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, I think that's better. Apologies for the sound earlier. Um, our
first order of business is to approve the board agenda. Is there a motion to approve the board agenda as presented? So moved. We have a motion from Director Simon. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Director Langenfeld. Any discussion hearing? None. Would all in
favor of approving the board agenda say I? I. Any opposed say nay. With six in favor and zero opposed, that agenda is approved. Our first uh recognition tonight is Emily Pion for the presidential award of for excellence in
mathematics and science teaching. Uh we welcome Dr. Dr. Mary Wolverton, associate superintendent for elementary schools, Denise Schnobble, the principal of Ramsey Elementary, and Emily Payan, second grade teacher at Ramsey Elementary. Welcome. Good evening, co-chair Duchaine uh
Zargo, uh board members, and superintendent McIntyre. We are very honored tonight to be able to recognize Emily Pion who has been awarded uh a presidential award for excellence in
science, mathematics, engineering and science teaching which recognizes outstanding teachers from across the nation. This award is a very rigorous process and it uh involves um as noted
all um teachers that um are interested in this process in all 50 states. The nominees for this go through an exceptionally rigorous application process and within that process they have to demonstrate their deep content
knowledge um and how that is applied to a v excuse me a wide range of learners in a variety of teaching environments. In this process, a panel of distinguished mathematicians, scientists, and
educators at the state level and at the national level review those applications and engage those teachers in a very rigorous process in relation to being considered, moved forward, and awarded
um this um honor. Um, this year in the United States, 336 teachers were awarded this uh, presidential award. Um, we're very honored to have Emily as um, one of the
teachers in the state of Minnesota that was awarded this. At this time, I'll turn it over to principal Denise Schnabble at Ramsey Elementary who will talk about Emily's great work in as a second grade teacher at Ramsey Elementary. Thank you.
Thank you co-chairs Arco and Deshaine and school board and superintendent Corey McIntyre. It is such a privilege to be here to talk about Emily. Emily Pan has served the families in this district for over 11 years and I've had the privilege to be part of five years
of those. In that time, I've grown to know her as a dedicated educator focused on meeting the needs of all of her learners. her expertise in identifying the needs and providing instruction and engaging ways that stands out about
Emily. She is a natural quiet leader not only in science and mathematics but also within our building culture and Emily is absolutely so deserving of this recognition. I'm happy to introduce to you Miss Emily Pan. Good evening, co-chairs Arco Duchaine,
and members of the board. Thank you so much for the incredible honor of being recognized here tonight. Math builds more than just academic skills. It builds confidence, resilience, and critical thinking. Research tells us that mathematics doesn't just predict later success in math. It also strongly
correlates with reading achievement, and overall academic growth. Math teaches us to look for patterns, to persevere through challenges, and to solve problems creatively. Skills that are essential in every subject and in life. Thank you to the board for your
continued investment in STEM education. My administrators, past and present, for your leadership and guidance. To my students, thank you for trusting me, challenging me, and reminding me daily why this work matters. Last but not least, to my husband, son, and my mom for your constant inspiration, support,
and encouragement. This award is a milestone, but it's also a reminder to keep pushing, keep learning, and keep advocating for the power of math to change lives. Thank you. Congratulation on your award. We'll do a district photo uh with you.
Do you have any photo? Great. We are going to include one other person in this photo and then um Emily's mother, Margaret, who received this award um when she was a teacher in our district. Well, while they're taking the photo,
I'll just repeat that so everyone can hear. So, we welcomed Emily's mother to join in the photograph, who also received this same award when she was a teacher. All right, thank you so much. Our next recognition is for Anoka Middle School for the Arts Magnet Merit School of
Excellence Award. We welcome Becky Broadier, associate superintendent for middle schools and Tom Hagerty, principal of Anoka Middle School for the Arts. Welcome. Good evening, co-chairs Arco and Deshaine, Superintendent McIntyre, members of the board. I'm here tonight
to share celebrations from our middle schools and recognize staff and students for their excellent and achievements. We'll start with the NOA Middle School for the Arts has been named National Merit School of Excellence by the Magnet Schools of America, the National Association for
Magnet and Theme-based Schools. The magnet schools of excellence is the top award category and is only awarded to a select group of magnet schools. Mr. Tom Hagerty, principal of AMSA is with us tonight to give you a little more information. Hey, good evening board,
board and chairs. Uh the National Merit School of Excellence is more than just a plaque on the wall. It's a validation of our AMSA staff collective commitments in arts integration in our classrooms and our school community. Uh when we talk about what this TR award truly means, we
have to acknowledge the multiaceted criteria by which it's judged, which includes student achievement, strong family and community partnerships, and teaching in and through the arts. Integrating arts into the curriculum is what we do at an NOA middle school for the arts and not only enhances the
learning, but integrates creativity and individual expression. uh gives our students the opportunity to choose how they want to explore, how they want to create, how do they want to express themselves in ways that resonates with them. The award belongs really to the people behind it, the students who
inspire us, the teachers at AMSA who guide them, then of course our family and community that rallies behind both of them, and of course our own curriculum integrator who couldn't be with us tonight, Dr. Yolanda Danchek. We just completed a performance, our spring musical performance, uh, Beauty and the
Beast is what they performed this year. The courage and the confidence that these 11, 12, and 13 year olds have is is just a wonder and astonishment every time I see them perform. And this is the students and adults were producing. It's just truly amazing. Uh in addition to
this wonderful award uh as part of our specially school for arts we were awarded the rank of superior and arts literacy magazine called the storm which is a student magazine edited and guided by Yolanda Danchek as well. U and that's just another amazing part of this award.
We do want to invite all the board members. We have our arts fest uh a week from Thursday the 15th from 5 to 7 and you're more than welcome. It's open to the community. We'd love to see you there. But I just want to tell you how proud I am to be the principal of of Anoka Middle School for the Arts. Uh
this community is just a great community to represent and I couldn't be happier. So thank you for this. Congratulations. Thank you. All right. Our next recognition is middle school student math and choir
awards. So we keep Becky Berdier, associate superintendent for middle schools and Tom Haggerty, principal of Anoka Middle School for the Arts, um, and their team. Wonderful. Thank you. Since 1968, the St. Cloud University departments of mathematics and statistics and computer science and
information technology have held annual mathematics contests for students in grades 7 through 12. On April 10th, top math students from each of our ana middle ana Henipin middle schools joined with 1,66 other student participants to
compete for team and individual honors. Anoke Henipin has a long history of excellence at the St. Cloud Math Contest and it was another banner year for our middle school students including Jackson Middle School with first, second, and third place wins by individuals and two
first place team wins. Second place team win by Oakview Middle School, third place team win by Roosevelt Middle School, among many other awards you'll hear about tonight from our schools. Students from all six Anoka Henipin middle schools were top performers and
I'm thrilled to introduce them to you tonight. In addition, each year the American Coral Directors of Association of Minnesota forms special honors choirs to provide enriched singing opportunities for students in grades four through 10. Anoka Henipin students
have a history of being selected to participate in the ACDA state honor choir and this year is no different. Over 2,000 students prepare pre-selected materials and compete in a rigorous audition process for placement into honor choir program with just 900
selected. Our extremely talented students stood out from the thousands and had the honor of performing with the honor choir. Tonight we have representatives from two of our middle schools to introduce to you and recognize. So with those uh that context, we'll start with the
recognitions from Anoka Middle School for the arts and Mr. Tom Horty. We have three students we're going to recognize here tonight. Uh first is Colen Johnson who scored in the top 5% of our eighth graders. Then it's uh Charlie Blancet
who Charlie scored in the top 10% for our eighth graders. And lastly, Daniel Bati, who scored in the top 10% of our eighth graders. Those are our three students from Manoka Middle School. Congratulations. So, we will do a district photo and then we invite family
members to come and take pictures as well uh of their students. Yeah. You let let Heather tell you where to where to go for the picture. There we go. Okay, family, please come up. Yeah, come come right up. You can get right up here to take a picture.
I think my son came. Congratulations once again. Oh yeah, I'll take it. Thanks, Linda. Good to see you. Our next uh middle school to be recognized is Rapids Middle School. We keep Becky Berdier and we welcome Demand Seals, principal for Rapids
Middle School. School board Superintendent McIntyre. Uh, thank you for having me to give me the honor of recognizing two of math scholars here uh for the math recognition award. We have with us tonight Cameron Lumis and Jesse Dorsy.
Congratulations guys. Congratulations students. Again, we'll do the district photo and then after that families can come up and get their own photograph. All right, family. Come on up. All right, congratulations again students. Our next middle school to be recognized
is Jackson Middle School. So we will welcome Joel Young, principal for Jackson Middle School and team. Are you going to introduce me or do I just Yeah, I'll reintroduce you. Okay. Okay. I would like to introduce Miss Belinda
Erdman's for the math recognitions. Uh good evening board and chairs. Um, for seventh grade, we took first place out of 23 schools and I have six students who scored in the top 10 and
5%. So we have Summit Wy, Kimber Novette, Timothy Tran, Delaney Collins, Griffin
Dolmire, and Isaac Soren. And then Isaac Soren also was first place out of 290 students. Okay. And then for eighth grade, uh the eighth grade team also took first place
out of 27 schools. And I have 11 students who scored in the top 10% and 5%. So, uh, scoring in the top 10 was Brody Melberg, Kaden
Eden, Mason Parisian, Mia Daw, and then in the top five, Ivan Oldroid, Andrew Cohen, Brida
Maul, Ivan Canut, or sorry, Evan Kudson, I Samler, Jonathan Hennessy, and Patrick Navertil. And then Patrick uh Navertil
was third out of 439 students. Oh, thank you. Congratulations. for parents. Parents, come on. Parents, come on up. Congratulations. All right, as we're uh getting some space in the room here, we will stay
with Jackson Middle School and uh have choir honores come up next. I don't think Thank you. I am pleased to introduce Miss Ruth Morgan for the state honor choir recognitions. Good evening. It's a
privilege to introduce you to the Jackson Choir students who auditioned and were selected to perform with the 2025 Minnesota ACDA 78 honor choirs. The honor choir experience for these students is extraordinary. The growth they show as singers and musicians filters into each of their choirs at
Jackson. Their leadership influences many others in choir at Jackson to work harder and grow as well. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the parents and families of these students for making this experience possible for their kids. And the Jackson Honor Choir students are
Ayaw Pjo. He sang bass. Lena Barnes alto. Norah Crossland soprano. Addison Nelson second soprano. And Zariah Williams alto. Thank you so much. kind of like the other group to come up and take
pictures. Congratulations. in the background. All right, our next middle school to be recognized is Northdale Middle School. We welcome Becky Broadier and Jeff Leech, uh, principal for Northdale Middle School and team. Welcome. And good evening, co-chair Arco
and Deshaine, board members, Superintendent McIntyre. It's my distinct pleasure to be here tonight to introduce you to one of our outstanding educators at Northdale Middle School, Miss Stephanie Pogaltz. Good evening. We have a few students from Northdale we would like to um recognize tonight.
Placing in the top 5% uh was Liam Jan and Henry Carney. And then in the top 10% we had Addie Stimwidel, uh Mia Pelton, Fatima Muhammad, Ferdosa Muhammad, and Lucas Hilker.
Congratulations students. All right, families, please come ahead and take your own pictures. Congratulations. Congratulations. Our next middle school to be recognized is Oakview Middle School. We welcome Becky Broadier, Gary Lundine, principal
for Oakview Middle School and team. Welcome. Yes. All right, co-chairs Arco and Desaine, board members, superintendent McIntyre. Uh, it's my honor to introduce Lauren Buzz, math teacher from Mo. He is going to
assist recognizing our math students. Thank you. At this time, I'd like to recognize several top award winners at the St. Cloud State University contest. In the seventh grade division, individually at the top 5%, we have Cameron Xman, Thomas Hansen, who also took fourth place in the contest as a seventh
grader, Matthew Ritter, who also took third place as a seventh grader individually at the contest. In the top 10%, Whitney Shepard for our seventh grade. In the eighth grade division, also our seventh grade placed second
place in the entire contest in the eighth grade division individually. in the top 10% Cole Minotaur, Barra Quinahan, and Joseph Reed. Congratulations students. One step to the right.
Perfect. All right, parents and family members, please feel free to come take your own photos. We got to go to Congratulations again students. All right. Thank you. All right. Our next recognition is Oakview
Middle School choir students. All right, board. It's my honor to introduce Jack Slavic as our choir teacher. So, Jack joins us tonight to assist us recognizing our choir students. Thank you. We have eight singers from Oakview
who made the state honor choirs this year. In the 456 honor choir, Balen Uveris and Emma Sodderland. Adeline Stock could not be here tonight. in the seventh and eighth grade state honor choirs. Addison Curtis, Mila
Leerman, Izzy Wood, Jacobe Jared, and Jacen Thunderberg. Congratulations students. I'm just going to take a few photos straight ahead. Next. All right. Family members, please feel free to come up and take
your own photo. All right, congratulations again students. Our next middle school is Roosevelt Middle School. Welcome again to Becky Broadier and Kayla Raki, principal for Roosevelt Middle School and their team.
Good evening board, co-chair Duchaine, co-chair Argo, and Superintendent McIntyre. So thrilled to be here this evening. I want to proudly introduce Mrs. Becky Defoe to honor our scholars tonight. Well, as you've heard, there were
439 eighth graders and we came third out of 27 schools um for our team. And I had Nico AIO for uh top 5%, Finn Appel for top
5%, Brandon Kurthers top 5%, Aiden Lavic top 10% and Landon Thomas top 10%. Congratulations students picture. And then we're going to take a photo. All right, families. Feel free to come
right up and get a photo. Congratulations again. Thank you. All right. There's one more recognition that uh we wanted to do and that is to celebrate National Volunteer Week. So, I'm going to share a statement that was
from our community education department. We had intended to share this at the last meeting, but with that one being postponed to today, we want to just take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank all of the volunteers in our community with a special thank you to those serving the students and staff of Anoka Henipin Schools. All of our
volunte all of our volunteers have had an incredible impact on our community. Last year, over 9,200 volunteers contributed almost 173,000 hours toward developing, supporting, and enhancing a variety of
programs in our schools and our communities. This year, we're on track to meet or exceed those numbers. Our volunteers are a really valuable resource, and their time and effort are so appreciated. On behalf of the Anoka Henipin schools, thank you again to our volunteers for everything they do to
show support to students, staff, and our community. Thank you. All right, members, 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. Um, alternatively,
is there a motion to accept the consent agenda as presented? So, move. Thank you, co-chair Argo. Is there a second? Second. Uh, thank you, Director Simon. Any discussion? Okay. Hearing none. Uh, would all those in favor say I. I. I.
Any oppose say nay? With six in favor and zero opposed, the consent agenda is approved. I'm going to hold for a second and we're going to transition the room from our recognitions to the rest of the meeting. Be right back.
I'm doing great. How are you? Jesus. Okay board, our next agenda item is the communications, delegations, and petitions section of our meeting. This is time for commu 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, but our policy does allow for community members um to have their time reduced in order to hear comments from all. So I think uh given we have 18 cards to keep our 20
cards to keep our meeting on time, we'll ask individuals to keep their comments to two minutes. Uh and I'll ask Cocher Arco to monitor a clock to help us stay on time. If um you have written testimony, we would welcome you to provide it to
Miss Kofsky here so that that can be provided to the full board uh after the meeting. A couple of procedural reminders. Our meeting participation procedures are in place to assure open and orderly public comments as well as
to protect the due process and privacy rights of individuals under the law. If speakers use specific names of students, identifying information, um names of staff or board members, I will need to interrupt and stop the speaker. Please remember to direct your comments to the
schoolboard co-chairs and members of the audience, please listen respectfully so that we could hear all speakers. Uh if we can't hear speakers, we may have to restart the timer to allow everyone a chance to be heard. Um any audience members that disrupt this portion of the meeting may be asked to leave for the
remainder of the meeting. With that uh we will get started. Our first speaker is Val Holtus. Welcome. Thanks for having me. Um, sometimes we hear that some of the board members question their role and
why they're even necessary if they're just to supposed to trust the experts. Your role is to govern. You have been elected as a nonpartisan official of a board, which is a unit of local government that specifically governs
school district number 11. Just like other nonpartisan elected officials, you must rely and trust that your local government responsibilities are carried out by trained professionals. A nonpartisan elected city council or county commissioner does
not direct a highway engineer how to do his job or tell him what his tools should be or tell a social worker how to work with families. An elected nonpartisan city council person does not determine what a water treatment plant engineer does or tell the planning
engineer how to plan for the next housing development. According to state statute 123B.09 subdivision 8, school board members must superintend the schools of the district, adopt rules for their organization, government, and
instruction. The board will adopt a calendar, balance a budget, maintain the physical plant of their school buildings, and follow rules and laws. The board must be certain to be lawful in order to qualify for state and federal funds. They must keep registers and
prescribe textbooks and courses of study. Prescribe in this case means to lay down as a guide, a rule, a direction, and make a recommendation. It does not mean to micromanage the teachers, creating a feeling that they're not trusted, under suspicion,
and that you are skeptical of their abilities. Despite the fact that many of them have years of education and experience, 15 seconds remain. No one wants to work in those suffocating, discouraging environments. The board needs to keep their partisan ideology
away from the classroom. In addition, the board needs to realize that they don't own the district and should not be the gatekeepers. You're at two minutes. Of whether or not their constituents are given the right to improve their district through a referendum if they vote to do so. I ask you to respect the teachers and other employees in this
district and trust their expertise and realize your unfounded assumptions of best instructional practice is detrimental to our students. I ask you to stop the dysfunction this board is becoming known for. Thank you.
Our next our next speaker is Penuri Graa Hicks. Welcome. Thank you. I am here today to read a message on behalf of a concerned Anoka Henipin parent who is also a teacher in the district and one of the several teachers that I know who
believes deeply in the power of public education, professionalism, and expertise of her fellow teachers. At your April 14th meeting, some of you ignored and dismissed the curriculum update recommendations from professional, licensed, and qualified
educators. Those of you who feel that personal ideology is a substitute for professional qualification, it is not. You want to indoctrinate our students in your own per personal ideology. The very thing which you are against, which is
hypocritical. It was suggested that lecture-based instruction should be dominant method in our classrooms. That is not developmentally appropriate for elementary students or even other students based on their learning styles. Some of you question whether our teachers are capable of leading
classroom conversations that include diverse viewpoints. And perhaps worst of all, you suggest that our district should do the bare minimum to comply with Minnesota's educational standards, especially those that reflect ethnic studies and inclusive practices. You
worry that diversity, equity, and inclusion will hurt rather than help our students, but that is nothing further from the truth. Diversity exists in public schools whether you believe it or not. Without our diverse cultures, we may have lost World War II. It was our
Navajo citizens and their language that developed the unbreakable code that helped us win. This is an example of an important historical fact and one amongst the many that should be taught and not overlooked. It is not lost that immigrants built this country. Their
stories are part of our history, are important, and should be authentically taught and told. The strength of our this country lies in its beautiful diversity and really we seek to make this country equitable for all and include all citizens to make America
great. Our next speaker is Steve Nelson. Welcome. Good evening. Thank you. Well, I'm not going to give you a curriculum report tonight. I used to chair the systems accountability committee years ago. You have now a CCAC, which is a community
curriculum advisory committee. You should utilize them to help you through your political questions that you have as to how your curriculum should go, how you should be teaching your classes, whether you should be lecturing, whether you should be doing workg
groupoups, whatever method it is, you should take their advice because these people I was on this committee for 13 years. I think I reported to the board um five or six years in a row on on how
the school district was performing and I'm reading about you in the newspaper and it's not good publicity. So the point is utilize the professionals that you have so that you can go ahead and move ahead without
making this a political issue for anything that you're doing. It doesn't have to be that way. She was there years and years ago. Sorry, old age comes at a bad time, you know. But I'm just saying that it's it's
not that hard to to do this and get rid of the politic part and just take the advice of the people you've hired, you've paid. Trust them because they are curriculum writers. They're educated people. They understand what they should be doing. How much time do I have?
30 seconds. 30 seconds. I I want to thank you for letting me have this time to talk to you about that. But it this can be so much more of a positive thing for all of you if you trust the people you've hired and trust the knowledge that they have. 15
seconds. So let your human resources deal with the rest of it. But take the politics out and go with the process, you know, your curriculum mandates from the state and then I think you'll be fine. Thank you.
Our next speaker is Jennifer Wahberg. Welcome. Thank you. Good evening members of the school board. The Child Nutrition Situs Supervisor Association stands before you tonight, not only as district employees,
but as individuals deeply committed to the well-being of our school communities, our staff, our students, and their families. Less than two weeks ago, we were informed of an 18 to 22% increase in our health insurance
premiums. Let's be clear, this is not a small adjustment. For many of us across many multiple bargaining units, this is a substantial hit to our take-home pay with the cost of living rising and wages that haven't kept the pace. Not to
mention a similar increase just eight months ago in September 2024. This added financial burden feels like a step backward and sends a painful message that the district is not prioritizing the well-being of its employees. We work
hard every day because we believe in the work we do. We are dedicated to serving our school communities with compassion and professionalism. But when faced with another steep insurance hike, many of us are being forced into impossible choices
between paying the mortgage or keeping our health insurance, between filling a prescription or putting food on the table. These are not abstract numbers. These are real people. child nutrition site supervisors, CNA, building supervisors, custodian, pair of
professionals, office staff, teachers, and more. People who show up day in day out because we care about our students. We deserve stability. We deserve fair treatment. We deserve a budgeting process that doesn't make us choose between our health and meeting our basic
needs. We ask you, no, we urge you to take a deeper look at the real life consequences of this decision. The human cost must be part of the equation. We need solutions that reflect care, compassion, and common sense. Please
don't just consider the numbers, consider the people behind it. Thank you for your time and for listening. Next speaker is Dr. Joey Baker. Thank you. Good evening, Superintendent McIntyre, Chairs Deshaane and Erico, and the members of the board. My name is Dr.
Jodie Baker. I've been connected to Noa Henipin most of my life. I was a student K12 and I've been in multiple teaching roles for the past 33 years. I still live in the district and I'm the literacy coach at Champlain Park High School. So, I have multiple stakeholder roles and I care deeply about the
education of our students. Four uh three out of four of my college degrees are in education, which I only tell you because my most important role is learner. To be a teacher learner means being vulnerable, being reflective, to embrace new ideas based on brain science,
learning science, and my experience as a teacher. The learning process involves being uncomfortable. So this evening, if you're uncomfortable or defensive, I invite you to notice that and lean into it and consider how you can learn from it. As I often tell my students who are experiencing discomfort,
congratulations, you're about to learn something. Some members of the board have recently proposed the idea of mandating 30 minutes of lecture per class. Requiring teachers to lecture for 30 minutes a class ignores brain and learning science. Requiring teachers to lecture
for 30 minutes a class dismisses their professionalism and their ability to determine which teaching method best meets the learners, the lessons purpose, and their students unique needs. Lectures one of our tools as teachers. It's not the only tool. It makes no more sense to mandate a teacher conduct 30
minutes of lecture per class than it does to tell a carpenter they must use their hammer 50% of the time. As professionals, teachers know they have lecturing as a tool. Mandating lecture disregards teachers experience and expertise. Students come to us with
their own genius and experiences. They're not blank vessels to be filled up by a teacher lecturing at them, especially not for 30 minutes. A Harvard University analysis of lectures concluded current best practice recommend lectures be used sparingly and
thoughtfully. There is an art and science to teaching. Learning is complicated, fascinating, and magical. I implore the board and all stakeholders sit in that messy, tense role of being a learner. Our students deserve that. Thank you.
Thompson. Thanks. I was shocked when I saw the health insurance rates for next year. If I stay in my current plan, my annual out-ofpocket premium will go from $9,60 to $14,400, a 23% increase. This amounts to
92% of my 2024 wages after taxes. Deductibles and co insurance amounts are increasing as well. Meanwhile, the district contributes $18,600 to $22,300 to a flexible benefit account for employees in the fixed flex groups
and an additional $840 to an HR for those on the family plan. These contributions alone are more than the annual salary of a full-time PAR. If the board is looking for ways to cut the budget or increase the reserves, perhaps you could downsize benefits for
these employees to what bottom feeders like me are receiving. After all, isn't this district all about equality? I confirmed with the district that they are the ones that set the premiums, not Medicica. The coverage for the GLP1 weight loss drug increases the premium
amounts by four to 5%. I should not be forced to pay for this drug or any other specialty drug that I do not use. Just by removing this from the coverage altogether, the district will save $2 and a half million dollars. I think the increase in high-cost claimment severity, particularly among children,
and the increase in the use of specialty drugs are the result of poor decision-making by district administrators over the last 5 to 10 years, which in turn has led to increased stress and anxiety levels for staff and students who are in the trenches day after day. Employees are
retiring early and positions are difficult to fill. There's no hope for recruiting new employees if we are not able to retain the ones we have, especially with these astronomical rate increases. Once again, the employees at the bottom of the totem pole continue to pay the price one way or the other.
Consider these proposals. One, offer cash in lie of health insurance coverage for employees who can't afford these new rates, or two, contribute an annual amount to an FBA for them to purchase their own plan outside the district. I'm asking the board to not approve the rate
increases under any of the options being proposed. Send the labor relations and benefits department back to the drawing board and do better for your employees. And lastly, I'd like to thank all the mega supporters here tonight who showed up in red, including some of the board members because happens to be my
favorite color. There we go. Our next speaker is Kate Wallheim. Kate. Okay. Uh we'll move to Trinet Langanger. Langner, sorry. Thank you.
Welcome. Good evening, Superintendent McIntyre and school board members. I come to you um as a teacher in Anoka Henipin. I brought with me my name is Jessica Lick. I am also a teacher in Anoka Henipin and a former graduate of
Anoka Henipin. Yeah. So I am here today as a teacher, a mom, a member of the community who has a real concern with the issue of social emotional learning being taken away as a curriculum for us.
I know we just found out recently um through our principal that there were three options for you and you were considering taking it away completely. We are here to speak about our need for
seal in our school. It connects it connects each student whether they are regulated or disregulated. It brings us together as a community. Our principal has does done an amazing job having monthly
um assemblies. These are words that focus on kindness, respect, responsibility. What were your favorites? Honesty. Um and courage. And to be here, I feel like I had to have the courage. My students, I teach third
grade, I've taught first grade at San Creek. And I know that these are students who come back who need to feel connected to their community, to their school, to have some kind of um compassion for each other. So I am
asking you to um consider keeping it whether you make it shorter or um let us keep it as it is. 15 seconds. Thank you. We will continue to connect, communicate, and make our community
better. Thank you. Our next speaker is Barbara Blake. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you, school board members. I'm here to express my serious concern regarding several points that were emerged from the recent schoolboard work session. As a teacher with over 25 years
experience, I hold a bachelor of science degree in biology, a chemistry minor, a master's degree in curriculum instruction, and have completed hundreds of hours of continuing education. This extensive background has provided me with deep understanding of subject matter, student development, and a wide
range of instructional strategies. I and my colleagues are experts in our classroom. We possess firsthand knowledge of our students and are best positioned to determine the optimal balance of direct instruction, inquiry based activities, and exploratory learning to maximize their engagement
and comprehension. Imposing rigid top-down mandates on instructional time and dictating specific pedagogical approaches risks undermining our professional judgment and expertise. Such policies can stifle creativity, limit our ability to respond to
individual student needs and ultimately hinder the developmental thinking, critical thinking skills. It is crucial that you trust us, the educators, to utilize our training and experience to create a dynamic and effective learning environments tailored to the diverse learning needs of our students. We are
committed to fostering a love of learning and preparing students for success in an everanging world. Furthermore, the notion of intentionally stress testing Minnesota state law regarding state standards compliance is deeply troubling and misguided. Minnesota law requires that teachers
teach state standards to all students. If a teacher fails to meet curriculum standards, it can lead to various consequences including be putting up being put on a probationary license, suspension, or even temper termination of employment. Consequences of teachers of not teaching the standards would fall
on the teachers. I urge the school board to reconsider these discussion points and to engage in a meaningful and collaborative dialogue with teachers before making any decisions that could negatively impact classroom instruction and student learning. Recognizing and valuing the professional expertise of
educators is not merely a matter of respect. It is a fundamental to the success of our schools and most importantly to the success of the students we serve. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Megan Schmidt. Welcome. At the start of formal education,
Socrates drew knowledge out of his students through questioning and dialogue, while Plato champion truth and structure. And so began the ongoing pendulum swing between inquiry and direct instruction. 2,000 years later, we know
that the best method of instruction depends entirely on the students in the room. And no one knows those students better than the teacher that is leading them. My name is Dr. Megan Schmidt. I'm a mathematics instructional coach at
Anoka High School. I hold hold a PhD in mathematics education from the University of Minnesota and I have spent most of my career leading in mathematics education at the local, state, and national levels. I am also a parent and a community member. In 2027, math will
join science and social studies in adopting new standards. And I'm concerned about a precedent of asking teachers to teach next generation standards with last generation's textbooks. We aren't going to create critical thinkers and creative problem solvers by asking kids to tune in to a
30-minute monologue and to lower the bar under the weight of nostalgia. These new standards will demand a true mastery of conceptual understanding, relevance, and procedural fluency. It's often said, even in this very room, that doing math in public feels intimidating. But that
fear doesn't stem from mathematics itself. It stems from the school math experience. The learners in this district deserve a different experience, one not built on formulas and fear, but on meaning, empowerment, and mastery.
combined with 21st century science and social studies. Our math specialist Jessica Tucker and I would welcome the opportunity to engage in a future work session with the board to discuss the deep mathematical knowledge for teaching that will be required to ensure an
Henipin students are truly prepared for college career and community life. Thank you. Our next speaker is Laurel Moore. Welcome. Thank you. All right. Good evening, co-chairs and Arco and Superintendent McIntyre,
members of the board. My name is Laurel and as a parent of three students in our district, I am increasingly concerned about the shift toward inquirybased learning in our classrooms. While exploration is valuable, I hear frustration from students who feel they're expected to solve problems or understand concepts without adequate
instruction beforehand. Our students want and need guidance in learning how to read, analyze, and evaluate effectively. Direct instruction is a proven method for building foundational knowledge, particularly for students who need extra support. This is where our focus should be and where our teachers
should be supported with the best tools and training. I trust that our teachers know that direct instruction is not lectures. It there's far more to it than that in a simple Google search to find out what it is. I know they know that. I'm grateful that our school board is prioritizing student learning and
achievement. It's encouraging to see meaningful discussions and applying lessons that we've learned from the science of reading to other curriculum areas. I value your careful consideration in board meetings to empower teachers in providing highquality instruction. Diverse perspectives on this board help ensure
well-rounded solutions and better outcomes for our staff and students. Anoka Henipin demonstrated foresight with the read Act, recognizing the need for structured literacy long before the law mandated it. We have an opportunity to lead in other subject areas as well,
ensuring our students receive the instruction they need to be engaged and successful both in the classroom and beyond. I urge the board to take decisive steps to prioritize evidence-based teaching methods and curriculum that build strong foundational skills for all learners.
Thank you for your time. Our next speaker is John Woolhopter. Welcome co-chairs to Shane and Arco, members of the board, Superintendent McIntyre. I want to start by saying that I believe every person in this room is here because they believe in providing a
quality education to the students of Anoka Henipin, even though we may have different visions for what that looks like. I'm here tonight to ask all board members of this board to show trust in your over 3,000 educators that work in schools across the district every day.
We are tired of the chaos caused by the actions and statements of some members of this board. We are tired of the uncertainty and constant changes in leadership brought on by this board generated chaos. We are tired of having our expertise, experience, and dedication questioned. We are tired of
being portrayed as some sort of other rather than the caring and compassionate educ advocates for education and students that we are. The teachers of an Oeniban are members of this community. We shop at the same stores, eat at the same restaurants, attend the same houses
of worship, join in cheering at the same sporting events, and send our children to the same schools that we teach at. The educators of In Noah Henipin share with the board a vested interest in providing the best education for all students across the district. We want students to graduate from Anokenipin
with the critical thinking skills and knowledge that they need to be successful beyond the district. To that end, we need the school board to trust the educators of anapin. Trust the teachers to interpret and apply required state standards in a
respectful and thoughtful way in our classrooms. Trust teachers to draw on our full repertoire of instructional methods and strategies based on recognized best practices in order to meet the needs of our students. Trust teachers to identify and recommend the
materials that will best support the learning of the students in our classrooms. 15 seconds. And finally, trust teachers to do the work that we have been hired to do to meet the needs of all of our students in our classrooms with care and compassion. Thank you.
Our next speaker is Katie Yanovc. Welcome. Thank you. Um, I am a teacher at Rapids High School and I teach I have taught physical science before we had Earth Science Standards. I teach chemistry and I also teach biology and AP biology. What I came to talk to you
tonight about is the curriculum adoption process in the district in case you're not familiar with it. It is an extensive process. It is not teachers coming together one day and saying, "Yep, this looks good." The first step in the
process is for the district to do an all call for many different sources to send their curriculum materials. Teachers look at them, evaluate them against a rubric to make sure they align with the state standards. At that point, then
teachers will pilot more than one set of curriculum materials in their classroom for an extended period of time. Then students, parents, and community members are given
several opportunities to provide feedback on the curriculum. After that has been done, then the science study committee meets. I have been a member of the science study
committee since the year 2019 because this is how long we have been working on implementing new science standards 6 through 12. When you go to a science study committee
meeting, there are also representatives of the community, teachers, administrators, and teachers who don't normally serve on the committee, but have piloted the
curriculum. It is only then when we work to build consensus, which you certainly know does not mean everybody agrees on everything 100%. It is only then that the recommendation comes to you. So my
message is when you dismiss or do not adopt curriculum after that process, you are not devaluing only the teachers input. You are devaluing students, parents and community members input as
well. Our next speaker is Kelly Bilki. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you, school board, for letting me speak today. Um, I have two kids that have gone through a Noa Henipin education and I've been a science teacher at Kun Rapids High School for 25 years. We have
used in the past when I started teaching, we used the Miller and Lavine Dragonfly book. We had kids copy down overhead transparency notes and we used worksheets from the CD ROM that came with the book. A few years later, I was even even able to display PowerPoints on our classroom's 25-in screen. And if I
planned ahead, we could go to the computer lab to use the internet. I was on curriculum writing teams at that time to make sure our biology classroom activities were aligned to the Minnesota state standards of the time which were very heavy on vocabulary and memorization of scientific knowledge. I
have seen a lot of changes since then both in pedagogy and in our student needs. Since 2019, when the Minnesota legislature approved the updated science standards that are based on NGSS, we have shifted our teaching from how I used to teach in the year 2000 to the phenomena based standards that NGSS is
based on. My biology colleagues behind me have spent hours studying and choosing versions of biology curricula that are very different from the dragonfly book of years past. I piloted New Visions during try two of this year. I normally teach mostly Project Lead the Way biomemed classes and New Visions
approaches student learning the same way Project Lead the Way does. Hands-on real world connections, making meaning in a student frame of reference, using scenarios for applications of learning, and students discovering through doing. Nowhere in this type of learning is 30 minutes of direct explicit instruction
time recommended, as it has been by some of the schoolboard members here before me. As far as I'm aware, there aren't any studies that prove this is best learning. Teachers are professionals in their craft. And just as teachers would never tell a surgeon or an engineer how to do their job, it does not make sense for someone outside of the field of
education to tell a teacher what the best way to teach kids is. I would ask that you have an open mind and trust the teachers in our district to make decisions that are best for students and not use something like 30 minutes of direct instruction as the line in the sand for not approving curriculum. Thank
you. Our next speaker is Trisha Thorson. Welcome. Good evening. Uh my name is Trisha Thorson. I've been teaching biology for 16 years now. The last nine of those have been at Andover High School. Over the last three years, I've been a part
of a team of Anoka Henipin biology teachers that have been researching and piloting biology curriculum for implementation. Based on all of our research and our observations in the classroom, we have come to an agreement on the best option for our students. This curriculum aligns with Minnesota science standards, engages students in
learning at a deeper level, and it has students doing science and applying their skills to new situation. The board's refusal to move forward with our recommendation is insulting to our profession. And the longer that the process of curriculum adoption is drug out, the more detrimental it is to our students. We are asking you to trust and
support our teachers and allow us to move forward with the curriculum that best fits our students needs. Thank you. Our next speaker is Emily Mcller. Welcome. Thank you. Hello, members of the board and our community. I'm here tonight as a
student. A student who is angry. angry because during teacher appreciation week, we've done nothing to truly appreciate our educators. Instead of celebrating them, we continue to disrespect and mistreat the very people who are the backbone to our schools. Our
teachers deserve better. And so do we as students. What's even more frustrating is watching this board make decisions that are not rooted in what is best for all students, but instead what is rooted in fear. fear that is driving you to dismantle DEI efforts that are essential
to creating safe, supportive schools. These decisions don't reflect the needs of the entire student body. They reflect the will of a loud few, the handful you have chosen to see. While the rest of us are left behind, silenced, and most
importantly, ignored. Specifically, we see this within the 30 minute lecture times. Research has proven that students only have one minute of attention span per their age and all students max out at 15 minutes. This doesn't benefit
educators. This doesn't benefit students and it doesn't benefit real learning. I want to be clear, our system is not perfect. But instead of working to fix what is broken, you are tearing down progress of countless educators,
students, and families that have fought hard to build. That's not leadership. That is being a coward. As a student, I feel the consequences of your choices every day in my learning, in my classrooms, and in the way that my
teachers are treated. While you undermine our educators and strip away DEI initiatives, you are telling me and so many others that we do not matter, that we are not worth an investment, but we are. We deserve a district that embraces every student, not just the one
who fits a narrow mold. Critical thinking, not political censorship, should guide our education system. We deserve a board that leads with courage and integrity, not fear and division. We do not deserve this treatment from some of our board members who have been nothing but inconsiderate and uneducated
on education itself. Do better. We are watching and we are fighting for the future we have, not what we currently are being treated as. Our next speaker is Joe Rothstein. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you. So you know what when you see it, we see
ignorance and we see arrogance. We see a lack of respect and common sense. We see division and short-sightedness. We see conservativism and elitism. And we know it. You were all elected into this role, but none of you were put there to tear
apart our educational system, which if you are honest with yourselves, is exactly what the three of you are doing. Your ethical and moral duty is to have all students best interests in mind, not your own interests or personal beliefs or those of the organization that helped to get you
elected. You should not be trying to micromanage the curriculum development process. You shouldn't be arbitrarily trying to decide what books are a part of a student learning. Nor should you be trying to make unilateral ignorant decisions about how the district should deal with social and emotional learning,
diversity, equality, and inclusion. You do not have that right, even if you believe that you do. You might not think that you feel that you are better than other people, but your actions certainly show us differently. One of the me board members was quoted
as saying, "Let's be really receptive to feedback and let's make common sense decisions and back our teachers ability to teach and our students ability to learn." End quote. Listen to yourselves and work to justly and fairly serve your
community. History is history. It happened. We all have the right to learn about any of it and all of it. Not talking about it and not learning about it does not keep it from having happened. nor does learning about it fully define who an individual becomes.
It helps create better informed citizens and a healthier society. Science exists because of what is real and what happens in our world. It evolves when new things are learned. It does not exist because what of what your beliefs are, what you want to have happen, or what you want to
deny. With the over 3,300 teachers, that's 59,000 years of teaching experience that come into the doors every day. Let the teachers do what they need to do. Get out of our way so we can do our jobs, please. Our next speaker is Beth Lynn
Himer. Welcome. Oh, thank you. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for having me here. Uh, Dr. McIntyre, co-chairs, um, Arco and Dasheen and the rest of the board members. My name is Beth Heimrell and I am a proud Anoka and employee for 30
years. My very first class I taught right behind that before they renovated this place on the second floor up here. And in those 30 years that I've been in an noipin, I have done hours upon hours of professional development. And as an
educator, we have learned to trust in what we see each and every student needs, right? Not there is not a playbook that works for every kid. If you were to come into my classroom, you would know that this student learns best
when they have a small group setting. This student learns best when I give them something to read and for them to find their vocabulary words with. This student needs extra support in this. We have students that learn from their multi- There are different intelligences. I know that's an older phrase, but like we
have kids who are artistically intelligent. We have kids who are musically intelligent, kids that are na natural intelligent. If we switch to and I know someone earlier I heard them say something about direct instruction, but that idea of that everyone's going to learn
linguistically and only through auditory and is not going to work for everyone. And if we all are here to believe in helping each and every one of our kids be the best they can be, we need to know that those hours that we did learning how to get kids to engage in conversation, no one would ever say that
we don't get to teach them things. We have ideas that we share. But the way that we do that isn't through just our voice to them. It's getting them to understand it and to question it and to have conversations about it. And we need to make sure that we give our teachers the ability to do that. I ask that you
trust the teachers with that. 15 seconds. Holy cranky. 20 goes fast. What I will just end with this in today. I understand budget cuts and I understand we weren't able to have our 30-year service, our little dinner this year and everything and but my administrator came
in, gave me my medallion, and I appreciated that and the kids cheered and it was fun. But the reality is, if you truly want to honor the teachers who put in their time, that you listen to the things that we have been taught by this district and all of our PD and let us teach the kids the best they can
learn. Let them learn. Thank you for your time. The next speaker is Judy Dunn. Judy Dunn. Okay. Uh Laura Olsen. Welcome. Welcome. Thank you. Good evening board. Good evening,
superintendent. My name is Laura Olsen. It used to be Laura Kaiser. So, most of the kids in the district know me as that. I've been an educator for 29 years, 23 of which have been in this district. I'm a mom. I've raised two kids by myself as a single mother in Andover. And I recently just got married
and moved to Ham Lake. I'm a taxpayer and I'm concerned about the money that we've been spending on our social studies curriculum writing. Um, I'm here representing all of my colleagues in social studies and especially my US studies teachers in seventh grade. Um, I
recently took part in a panel at a town hall meeting and I got to spend the evening with a couple of members of the board and I asked a couple questions. I wanted them to point out exactly where they didn't like what we had accomplished um, a year ago. I wanted to
see well what part of that lesson or what part of that standard did you not understand? And I'm asking you, the board, to ask us, we are the professionals. I know everybody has their own soap board and they're standing up on this box and they want to
tell us what they think the standards say, but we know what they say and we are the educators and we are not trying to indoctrinate our children. Um, last year we went through that ginormous process that the science teacher just explained for social studies. We looked
at a new book. We agreed on a new book. We were like gung-ho going for that new book and we were stoked. We were excited. And then it got derailed and we do not have that book. I'm teaching with a book that is more than 12 years old. I no longer have access online. I'm no
longer able to change any of the ability for reading levels for my students. 15 seconds. All right. In conclusion, this is what I want to ask. I'm here again. I'm in front of you. I want some answers. It's May. Am I writing this summer or do I get to go on a vacation
with my family because I still can't plan that. Am I getting a new book? Um, this is the seventh year in a row maybe of me doing something else. I need some answers, please. Thank you. Okay, that concludes our yellow cards. There's no more over there. Okay,
very good. So, board members, our next agenda item is item seven, the board calendar and district updates. We will turn it over to Superintendent McIntyre. All right. Good evening, board members. Is this on? I don't Can you
hear it? Okay. Yeah. I'm going to just pause till get some transition time. All right, board members. I'm going to jump in here and tonight with the superintendent's report, I'll be presenting items of interest to the board and our community regarding
activities and events and it's a busy time of year that we are proud of in our district. And we do this to celebrate students, staff, and community members who are contributing to the accomplishment of our mission, which is to effectively educate each of our students for success. So to start us off, the
Minnesota Scholastic Art and Writing Awards recognize students for excellence. Gold Key awards are presented to students who achieve at the highest level. Have a couple to recognize tonight. Andover High School freshman
Marcy Karen was honored for her sculpture Jawbreaker. You can see that on the screen there. Blaine High School junior Haley Linka was honored for her painting Sisterly Boredom with three girls. I know all about this. Um, great
piece of work there. the gold art key award again both of them a number of students from across the district were recognized with silver key and also honorable mention awards and that information is posted on our website at ahschools
us. I just want to take a moment as my second item tonight to uh publicly thank our law enforcement partners for close cooperation and communication to ensure that our schools remain safe and our communities are informed during some high-profile situations we've
experienced here recently in the community over the past few weeks. So, just to reiterate, that partnership between school leaders and our law enforcement agencies really serve our communities and it really makes a difference to ensure the safety of our students and staff and those efforts are
greatly appreciated. And finally, Enoka Henipin is celebrating and honoring staff members and the impact they make during employee appreciation week this week, May 5th through the 9th. uh this week here and this these events in the district coincide with the
national teacher appreciation week and there are many activities scheduled throughout the district by volunteer groups in our schools to show support for staff. The theme for employee recog or employee appreciation week is you make a difference. It's a time to say
thank you to all of our staff to show our appreciation for all staff does for our students and the communities we serve. Perhaps the group that appreciates our staff the most are our students. So when it came to time to produce a video message that shows the
true appreciation for all we do as a school system, students stepped up to deliver that message. So let's take a look. Each day, our staff work to prepare students for life and inspire a future without limit.
Some days that can be a challenge. But each day we come back to school seeking knowledge, inspiration, encouragement, and support. We show up ready to learn. We are
capable, but we can't do it on our own. Our staff make a difference each day. At our school, they help us learn to read, how to take turns and understand routines. Our teachers help us learn
about math and science and how to work together. They teach us about the world around us and how to think critically and solve problems. The staff at our school guide us and help us feel safe and welcome like we
belong. Staff care and help us understand how to navigate our schedules and plan for the next step in our educational journey. As students, we are the future. And what staff do today make a difference for us.
It's here that we dream and imagine what our future could be. Staff in our schools make a difference. Each and every one of them. Whether they are serving up a smile, listening with
care, someone we can count on, staff at our school keep us connected, and keep things rolling smoothly each day. Staff at our school make a difference each and every one of them. You focus on your purpose. You give it
your all. And each day we see how much you care. You may never know the difference that you make, but we want you to know it is valued. Thank you for all that you do to support students because in Anoka Henipin, you make a
difference. You you you make a difference. Thank you. Thank you to our communications team for putting that together. And it's just a good reminder that it does take all of our staff and all the roles in the district to really um do everything we need to do to bring
out the best in our students. And uh for me, just a good reminder that our staff are the backbone of everything we do to help our students thrive. So um from I know you joined me in this. Thank you to all of our staff in every role in the district, nearly 7,500 employees across the system. Thanks for everything they
do each and every day. And uh that wraps up and we will continue to see those activities throughout the week in our buildings appreciating and and honoring our employees. So um coach Duchaine, that is my superintendent report for this evening. Thank you. Thank you board members. Any questions for
Superintendent McIntyre? All right. Our next agenda item includes several resolutions brought forward by employee services. So we will welcome Dr. Jennifer Cherry, executive director of human resources. Thank you, co-chair Duchaine. Uh members
of the board, Superintendent McIntyre, I have three resolutions this evening pertaining to staffing. The first one is a resolution relating to the non-renewal of teaching contracts of probationary teachers. Uh there are 10 teachers on um
this resolution who have uh are probationary teachers and uh their contracts are being nonredo due to a reduction in student enrollment uh financial condition of the district and other appropriate reasons. At this time,
I'm recommending uh um approval of this resolution. Thank you. Uh board members, are there any questions for Dr. Cherry on this resolution? If not, members, before us is a resolution relating to the non-renewal of teaching contracts of
probationary teachers as presented in appendix J. Hearing no requests for discussion. Uh would the clerk please call the role? Simon votes I. Hman I. Audet I. Langenfeld I. Arco I. Desaine
I. With six in favor and zero opposed, the resolution in appendix J is adopted. You can present your next one. Thank you. The second resolution this evening is to resend the inclusion of certain teachers names in the resolution terminating probationary teachers. So,
this is a follow-up um from our last business meeting and this is the the wonderful news where we have an opportunity uh to hire back some of our newer teachers that um we had to um issue non-renewals to in the last uh the
last business meeting. So, before you are 19 names of teachers um that uh we are recommending um um bringing back uh for hire in the next school year. Thank you board members. Any questions for Dr. Cherry on this
resolution? Okay. If not, uh members before us is a resolution to resend the inclusion of certain teachers names in res in the resolution terminating probationary teachers as presented in appendix K. Hearing no requests for discussion, would the clerk please call
the role? Simon votes I. Hman I. Aat I. Langenfeld I. Arco I. Desaine I. With six in favor and zero opposed, the resolution in appendix K is adopted. Um, please continue. And finally, this
evening in appendix L, uh you will see a resolution proposing the immediate discharge of continuing contract teachers. Uh this is um uh in uh compliance with Minnesota statute 122A.
40 uh subdivision 13 part 6. There are three names. These uh names are um not public information according to the Minnesota government data practices act. Is there any questions? I can um
follow up with those now. But it is a proposal to approve this resolution. Board members, any questions on this resolution? Okay. If not, members before us is a resolution proposing immediate discharge of continuing contract teachers as presented in appendix L.
Hearing no request for discussion, would the clerk please call the role? Simon votes I. Hulman I. Audet I. Langenfeld I. Arco I. Dshane I. With six in favor and zero opposed. That resolution is adopted as well. Thank you Dr. Cherry.
Thank you. Our next agenda item is elementary and secondary education item 9A, the elementary ELA initial curriculum adoption and recommendation uh which is coming before us for approval tonight. We welcome Dr. Mary Wolverton, associate
superintendent, an Sangster, director of elementary curriculum instruction and assessment uh and the rest of the team. Welcome. Thank you all for being here. Good evening, co-chair Shane Arco, school board members, and superintendent
McIntyre. This evening, our team is coming forward with providing an update and a recommendation on the elementary ELA adoption. The purpose of our meeting, as noted, excuse me, is to share the results of the elementary ELA pilot and study
committee feedback and present the recommendation for the elementary ELA curricular resource for the 202526 school year. And we will first begin with reviewing the information from the ELA
study committee. Good evening, co-chairs to Shane Arco, members of the board, and superintendent McIntyre. On our um study committee timeline, in November, the ELA study committee met to establish goals, become familiar with the read act, the reading
to ensure academic development act, and have a common understanding of the science of reading. In December, the committee looked at an OKhenipin's reading data aligned to multi-tered systems of support. And then in January of 2024, they reviewed the current resource wonders along with the
Minnesota ELA 2020 standards. In February of 2024, a recommendation and rationale were created from the committee that a new resource was needing to be piloted. In March of 2024, an all call of curricular materials and a review of those resources took place.
And then in April of 2024, the committee reviewed resource types along with an Anoka Henipin rubric that would be used to analyze those resources. And in June of 2024, EL opened up great minds, wit, and wisdom
and amplify CKLA core knowledge, language arts presented to the committee, and then they completed an evaluation of those resources. We then move to piloting um the recommendations and these are the configurations of resources that were
piloted in grades K3 with four different options and then we have the grade four and five pilot configurations with two options. Next is the ELA pilot moving into fall of 2024. And in trimester 1, we started
with round pilot round one. And then moving into August, we had teacher training for those pilot teachers on the materials that they would use just for round one. September 3rd through November 22nd, the te teachers piloted their round one resources. And in the middle of that round one pilot, we
learned of the CKLA third edition release that would take place in December. So on November 5th, the teachers received some training on the resource they would then pilot for round two. They received a survey for round
one from November 11th through the 26th that were completed by the pilot teachers. And then trimester 2 began. So December 2nd through March 6th, the teachers would pilot their round two resources of which they were trained back in November. January 2nd, those
piloting CK those who were piloting CKA would switch to their third edition resource that had been released. We then learned um in the midst of that January of the release of a resource called W Arts and Letters which was created from
Whit Wisdom. February 18th, pilot teachers would participate in the deep dive of the arts and letters resource looking at that in relation to wit and wisdom. And then February 25th through March 6th,
the survey for round two pilot teachers was sent out and completed. That concluded the piloting of the resources for K5. And we then brought the study committee and pilot teachers together April 1st and April 8th to review the pilot data and
generate recommendations. And from that Candace will share the pilot teachers feedback. Good evening co-chairs Duchain and Arco, members of the school board and superintendent McIntyre. You can see um on the next slide there the overall
this is our summary of the dimension data for K3 knowledge building. So you can see from a statistical standpoint that this data reflects the strongly agree and agree um for the pilot
teacher. Again, CKLA outlined in blue for each dimension and Whiten wisdom geodess outlined in green for the um each dimension with the overall of K3 knowledge building um resulting in CQLA
being 75% compared to the 55% of Whiten wisdom and geodess. Next we have K3 skill building. Um and this was um the foundational skills andor the word recognition
components for kindergarten through third grade. Again the agree and strongly agree for each of the dimensions um summarized outlined um CLA in blue bridge to read in red. Um you can see a little more discrepancy here
on the phonological awareness and phmic awareness phonics and fluency but then CQLA um in instructional supports and material managements having higher scores um along with assessment overall they're very close which leads us to our
overall options for implementations pairings um on the following slides and next we have the four five again summaries um CKLA in um and this is uh comprehensively with foundational
and knowledge building together in one resource. CKLA is in blue, witten, wisdom and functional morphology in orange. Um this also is um interesting to look at the results in the dimension summaries as well because um Whiten
wisdom and functional morphology outperformed um CQLA which again leads to the pairing options for the voting for the study committee and pilot teachers on the following slides. That led us to um different options for
the um pilot teachers and the study committee to provide us feedback on from April 1st and April 8th. One of the options was CQLA K5 comprehensively. The next option is CQLA
K5 paired with bridge to read K3. Um and another one was K3 RK5 um CQLA comprehensive bridge to read K3 and then functional morphology for FI. Those are results of those three surveys put
together in that option. And then the last option was the wit and wisdom K5 bridge to read K3 functional morphology 45 which leads us to the overall results. Okay,
sorry. Good evening, co-chairs to Shane and Arco, members of the board and superintendent McIntyre. As you can see, these are our overall survey results where we had 71% of our um teachers that selected the CKLA um K5
and bridge to read for skills K3 and functional morphology 45. So, the committee's recommendation offers an evidence-based curriculum rooted in the science of reading. And this option most closely adheres to the criteria previously defined by the ELA study
committee in terms of content, word recognition, writing, and handwriting. So now I'd like to bring you through the budget budgetary expenditures um for this ELA adoption. So if you look at the first line item that is bridgeto
read oftentime we are told that there is no cost associated with bridgeto read. So you might be surprised to see that. But there is a printing cost of materials. And then also for professional development, those costs are estimated costs at this point. And
the 15,000 for professional development reflects teacher salaries if we are to provide professional development in August outside of the duty days of the school year. And then of course the largest purchase here is CKLA, which is the comprehensive K5. We're a little over
4.5 million for um student materials, student licenses, and teacher licenses. And that is over a 7-year period. Then the professional development outline for
228,300 is for the first year of um implementation. And the next slide I'll go into more detail about what that looks like. And then finally, functional morphology. that is also a seven-year um over a seven-year span and that C that
is for teacher licenses and then the professional development is for one year at 27,850. So when you look at materials professional development we're right around $5 million investment in our ELA
adoption. So, Bridgeto Read um professional development, like I said, this is year one. Um all teachers who do bridgeto read have an initial three-hour training. So, most of our teachers have already been trained, but we have some
um teachers that did not participate in the Bridgeto Read pilot and we will have new teachers. And then we have ongoing coaching support um through serve Minnesota and our literacy specialists who have supported bridge to read um quite extensively in their
role. And then when we look at CKLA they provide an initial training for teachers which is a full day. Um part of that day is just letting them know what is CKLA, how do you get how do you use the website, but then they also get some planning time. So when they are starting
the school year, they know um really where to start. And then very important that our leaders have an understanding of CKLA as they're the instructional leaders in the building. So they will receive a program overview um for three hours. And we also have an opportunity
to have, and that's not on here, but we just found out about it, a session for our principles and hopefully also our literacy specialists to learn about the mindset shifts that will come along with um this new curriculum. And then we have um coaching that um we will be able to
take advantage of flexibly for our leaders um six hours per building um during the next school year. And then finally, functional morphology. That has an initial six-hour training for our teachers and then an ongoing
implementation support and consulting for our district level team so they can support the teachers at the building. And so now we're going to talk about implementation for year one and then beyond. And I will turn that back over to Michelle.
So implementation for year one this spring we're working with we will work with the communications department to develop a communication plan for our principles for the teachers and families and our community members um hosting an open house for the staff to come and
preview the materials as well as then our literacy specialists are working in aligning those um Minnesota 2020 new ELA academic standards along with bridgeto read function morphology and CKLA and getting all those pieces aligned together and
then providing a CKLA program overview for leaders in this spring as well in that plan. Then in June, um our curriculum writing teams are looking are working on adjusting the report card to reflect those new standards. Uh reviewing and
finalizing the alignment of the standards with bridge to read, functional morphology, and CKLA as our literacy specialists won't have that completed. um before then and so we'll need to finalize that in August. Then will be the launch of CKLA initial
training for teachers that full day and then bridgeto read initial training for staff as well. In October we have the functional morphology initial training for grades four and five. um so they can attend that CKLA launch in August um
training then have that later inter um introduced that function morphology piece. Here we have for year one a table kind of outlining the implementation support for our teachers, our literacy specialists and our administrators and district leaders. So you can see all the
different um types of support and who the people will be um receipt having that support over the year. And then we will continue to monitor and adjust um determining any additional supports that might be needed to refine to um sustain
that implementation over the life of the adoption by receiving stakeholder feedback and ongoing review and student achievement data as well. All right. And that brings us to year two. Again, we would have to provide
that training for new teachers and teachers again switching grade levels because the components are different per grade levels. Um, then we would look to line align do deep dive into the instructional components. Um, and again connecting back to that why of letters and our OLA professional development
that we've had over the last couple years. Some of those key focuses would be assessment, writing, vocabulary, language development. Another component of year 2 implementation would be across district communities of practice where all educators would be aligned um with
like um schools to share instructional practices and work collaboratively and refining the implementation along with principles and literacy specialists. and would also be looking to integrate the intervention resources to better align
to our tier one practices. And again, um for the year two to for substained implementation, um teachers, literacy specialists, administrators, and district leadership would be involved in coaching cycles,
walkthrough cycles, and check-ins throughout. Um again, we would be um seeking stake uh stakeholder feedback and reviewing that student achievement data to see better how um to support the ongoing um implementation of the
resources. And our recommendation at this time is that the board consider and approve CKLA comprehensive K5 bridge to read for grades K through three and functional morphology grades four through five
which best meet the needs of the Anoka Henipin elementary stu students. Um, we would implement this in all grade levels, K5. And our recommendation is to adopt and purchase CKLA comprehensive K5, bridgeto read K3 and functional
morphology 45 for the 2526 school year. And at this time, we would like to thank the board for your support during this process and open it up for questions and comments. Thank you very much for the presentation. Board members, do we have
any questions or comments at this time? Uh, Director Lingfeld. Thank you. First of all, thank you. I I can't tell you how important this work is to me personally. Um, I believe that it's vitally important that every child in
our district can read. And so, I've been engaging in it very as much as I can throughout this process. I think one of the things as I've looked at this and reflected on my own experience starting with really getting involved in understanding bridge to read and and
then um looking at letters did not go through the training actually watched the bridgeto read training as well and and um have been in many classrooms this ELA adoption process has been a journey and a really important journey I know
that the curriculum that we are looking to purchase has empirical data to support it. Um I spent a lot of time just looking at wit and wisdom and CKLA had the privilege before we even went into the final um
chapter so to speak um to meet with all of you. They were all available and answered all my questions. went through all the units to understand what was there and I know there were some changes and I I I left there feeling very um
informed and felt that if I had additional questions I could I could reach out to you as well. Then when we got into I was not a member of the selection committee. I know uh co-chair Duchaine and director uh Audet were but
um I was able to join uh the two evening debriefing pilots and in that process really heard back from what our piloting teachers as well as administrators had and gave us that feedback which I think was so very important and to have it was
during those critical conversations sitting there really listening to our teachers uh talk about their experiences. I was actually invited to a fourth grade classroom then to observe functional morphology and I I went as quickly as I could and and really got as
informed as I could. So I think as we look to all of these pieces um and I know that just a curious question about where we are with letters training and Ola training. That would be the other piece of this. And then also we did receive a concern from two community
members um who are concerned about a couple of the um topics in in the units. And I know that we talked briefly about that. I looked at all the units as well during that time and shared those with. So maybe we could talk about if there
are concerns about units where where just a few in terms of not so much um content thinking they might not be um at an age, you know, they might be too much for a little one. They're worried about the topics aren't really right for age groups. And that would be American
independence and and those kinds of things. But I know they aren't a major part. I just wanted to make sure that was there. So just thinking through just an update where we are with letters and OLA and then also talking about as we look at the units and you start doing
the writing and aligning of standards how that would look in our two-step process and I know you're fully aware that the board is supportive of a two-step process. We'll purchase the curriculum and then and approve that and then next step would be to go through those units. Correct. Is that what we're
thinking? Okay. So again, sincere gratitude. Um I know that um many teachers are looking forward to this and really um want the best for our kids to be able to read. So I I really am excited about it. um looking forward to
I just uh talked um and had a an important conversation earlier today about what Mississippi did and invested in the incredible increases that they've seen with their students and uh it was a full hands-on full investment to move it
forward. So anyway, I want to thank you for all of that and I don't know if you want to answer the ELA questions. And um Ann, maybe I could have Ann give an update in relation to letters. We as we've been mapping out and looking at our professional development calendars for
next year, specifically in relation to building PD and district PD. Um, Anna's been monitoring staff at the elementary level that have completed letters or going into letters as well as Ola. So, I'll let you kind of speak to that. I'll
start with Ola. Um, this year we had three about 400 fourth and fifth grade teachers, talent development teachers, and special education teachers at the elementary level who took OLA. It's 53 hours of professional development and um
all but three completed um with 80% accuracy which is what the state is requiring. So that is a huge feat for all of those teachers. And then in terms of letters, we've been working on letters since 2022. And we have um approximately 400
teachers um K3 plus literacy specialists, literacy intervention teachers, ML teachers who have completed that training. And it's about a three-year training just because it takes longer. So when we think about who is left, we have about
um60 teachers who are enrolled in it now who still need to finish. And then we are working on the numbers of new teachers. We're working with principles to determine how many, but at last count we had about 40 that would need to go through OLA and about the same amount
that would need to go through letters. And of course, new teachers coming in, that's always a variable that we account for as well. I would add one more um variable to that. Um in addition to your question, at the elementary level, all 25 elementary principles, the directors
and myself went through two years of letters for administrators professional development. And I think we're one of the few districts in the state of Minnesota that have completed that. I think maybe one of two. And then perhaps you said this, how many of our teachers are already trained? I know you started
this years before it was required. So I think if we look at both um OLA and letters and I'm trying to like we have so many charts with all of these numbers on them. So we will for sure tell you the exact number but I think we're probably right around 700 teachers that
have completed the work. That's so excellent. Thank you. Okay, board members, anyone else with questions or comments? Uh, Director Hookman, sorry. Yeah, thank you all so much. It um I was able to come in and look through the materials with you, answered all my
questions. It was wonderful and insightful. Uh really appreciate that. I know it's been an enormous task u working through it all and especially just grateful for all the teachers leaning into this working hard to get the training to learn so many new things
and um to be prepared for um new curriculum next year. It's it's still going to be a lot of work but they've been working hard. It's it's great to see uh for those who don't know the science of reading isn't a single program or method. It's a evidence-based framework built in decades of rigorous
peer-reviewed research. um from cognitive psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, education, developmental psychology, randomized testing and trials, longitudinal studies following kids from kindergarten through high school. So, it's really great that we're
following this method um of research and comprehensive approach um that includes word recognition, foundational skills, phenomic awareness, phonics, but also language comprehension. I mean, you had it up there on those charts. all the things that these teachers are doing.
It's really amazing. And to uh embrace this researchbased approach to uh get our skills for our students turned around and get those test scores rising again. Um I know the countless hours and there's so much more ahead. Uh really appreciate the work that everyone has
done. Um because we know um we need every child to to read and especially in those early years. It's really a skill that's essential throughout life. So very hopeful and excited in uh the core CKLA
and uh hopefully we see a resurgence in literacy around the district. Thank you. Welcome. Okay, Director ARC. Okay. Thank you, co-chair. Um, okay. So, the board is about to take a vote on
whether or not to adopt a new or perhaps old and principal curriculum for reading instruction in the In Noah Henipin schools. And while I I love to hear all the research behind it, I also love context. So, I think it's worth taking a moment to reflect on how we kind of as a nation more so than just the district
got here and why this vote is necessary in the first place. So it goes back to in around the 1980s and 1990s, new ideas about how children should learn to read became popular in American schools. Instead of focusing on teaching kids how to sound out words through letters and sounds called
phonics, many schools adopted methods that relied on students guessing words using pictures, sentence structure, and context clues. These approaches over time proved to be ineffective and harmful to reading development. A major influence on these practices was the reading recovery method first developed
in the 1970s by Mari Clay, a teacher and researcher from New Zealand. Her approach emphasized the three queuing strategy, encouraging children to guess words based on multiple clues rather than decoding words through systematic phonics. Influential educators including Gayu Panel and Irene Fountainis and
later Lucy Caukins help helped to popularize these methods. Their programs became widely adopted across the US despite lacking strong foundations in the science of reading. In 2000, the National Reading Panel, after reviewing decades of research, issued a clear report. Children need systematic phonics instruction to learn to read
successfully. Teaching them to guess words based on context does not work for most students, especially for those who struggle. Despite this scientific consensus, queuing based methods remain widespread and popular. Programs under the label of balanced literacy, which often included very little structured phonics, continue to be trusted by many
schools experts and teachers. At its peak, the teachers college reading and writing pro program curriculum developed by Lucy Caukins was used in about one of four elementary schools in America with over 170,000 teachers attending Caukins training institute in New York to learn
these methods. By 2018, as criticism grew louder, Lucy Caukins made updates to her curriculum by adding phonics units. However, the program still leaned heavily on the three queuing and guessing strategies, not full systematic phonics instruction. Despite the clear research or despite
all this, the research is clear. Guessing is not reading. Children must be explicitly taught to decode words through phonics. Decades of cognitive science prove it. Yet, millions of children were taught using methods that ignored this research. And that brings us to today. As the board prepares to vote on implementing a curriculum that relies
heavily on systematic phonics instruction to ensure that every child learns to read. So just to add further context, it certainly is the case that the In Noah Henipin district never fully removed the use of phonics from literacy, but it is also true that we're adopting a curriculum that relies heavily on phonics and even just in the
pilot program, we've seen great success in my opinion. So I'd like to thank the district and all the teachers um for recognizing the need for phonics well in advance of the state requiring it and for doing the hard work necessary to pilot and implement a new reading curriculum. I'd also like to just take a
minute to acknowledge just some of the things that were said earlier. There is one one message that was overwhelming from all of the community comment, which is trust the teachers. Well, I do trust the teachers. That's why I'm going to be voting on this curriculum. The the question the real question that wasn't asked is which
teachers should should I trust because the reality is there is not broad consensus on a lot of the things that were discussed. And the reason that I'm mentioning that now is because it's I guess ironic to me that what we're doing with the reading curriculum
is we're putting direct instruction back into how to teach kids how to read and then simultaneously removing it from every other um subject. So I do trust the teachers. There's not broad consensus on this. The question is which
one. Um, I certainly hold Director Hulkman's opinion in high regard and other teachers in the district who have voiced concerns about a lack of direct instruction. So, I'm very happy to see it returned here and yeah, that concludes my comments. Uh, Director Adet, thank you. um as as
we've been sitting here um a brief comment came through um when you were explaining some of the curriculum related to hand handwriting and write just writing and I wondered if you could give us any insight into the material we'll be using and just um what components of you know writing or
handwriting are either in it or not in it because I I do get that question from time to time and I'm just I'm just curious what what it will include. I I'm gonna maybe ask a few more clarifying questions because it's
there's lots of layers to it. Um so CLA has that comprehensive piece because it it it has that all the components of our scars buzz rope and evidence-based practices. Um we've been piloting bridge to read which is also a highly aligned um
curriculum as well but it is not intended to hit all those other components of um reading instruction. So it is for decoding words. So phonics and phmic awareness. However, when it comes to
handwriting and handwriting development, um CQLA has those components um in it as well. That's why it was be we felt it was best based on the feedback from the pilot teachers to have not just CQLA knowledge and not just bridge to read um
by itself, but partnered together that it made it more comprehensive for our students. Does that kind of want more into the handwriting? So the foundational components of the um that and then went beyond that third grade we move more
into the composition side of writing and then that's where CKLA is more robust where bridge trade was never intended to support the composition side of writing. Really good. Okay. Good. Thank you. I appreciate that. Yep. Okay. Board members, any other comments?
All right. I will uh just say um and echo a thanks as well. Appreciate the work that you and the team did. I think we can see um and as director Langenfeld pointed out, I was able to participate in the ELA curriculum committee along
with Director Adet. We we both really appreciated that opportunity and the participation that we were able to have as a part of that movement. Um, and I think we could see firsthand uh something that uh sort of maybe lends itself to an answer to the question that
you asked about like which teachers to trust. Uh, you know, I think the process builds the trust, right? It builds consensus. There's a variety of stakeholders, a variety of participants in that body of work. Um, so it's not just a singular voice, a singular
teacher um, perspective. It's it's consensus building and it's informed by the many. So, I appreciated that. Thank you, Superintendent McIntyre. I be remiss if I didn't also just weigh in and say thank you. Uh this has been an
18-month process. So, I just want to say thank you to Dr. Wolverton. um to Michelle, Candace, and an for guiding us through some uncertainty through as the state rolls out new expectations, keeping us focused, as the board members
pointed out, on what instructional outcomes we're aiming for. And to the board members, you have many decisions you make. This maybe is one of the most important ones you make is picking and selecting and investing. I know we saw lots of big dollar signs. That's an
investment. It's an investment in in one of the most primary things we do as a school district around literacy. So, I just want to say thank you to the board for supporting the process and really diving in. Many of you were immersed in it and really trying to understand and learn um the ins and outs of the process
and and trying to understand the outcomes of the hard work of our of our team. team. And then lastly, just to say thanks to the teachers who put hours and months and days into piloting and giving us that critical feedback and measurement to bring back to you to make
a decision. So, um, we're excited. We're excited to get this in place and and see like director said the results come from that. So, thank you. Okay, members, any further discussion? All right, hearing none. before us uh is
the elementary ELA initial curriculum adoption and recommendation as presented in appendix N. Is there a motion to approve the elementary ELA initial curriculum adoption and recommendation as presented? So moved. Thank you, Director
Langenfeld. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Director Simon. Any further discussion? Would all those in favor say I? I. Any oppose say nay? The motion passes six uh to zero. Thank you. Thank
you. Okay, board. Our next agenda item is the review and recommendation for approval tonight. We welcome again Dr. Mary Wolverton, associate superintendent, and Becky Rodier, associate superintendent, as well as uh Dr. Dr. John Roahert, our
research and evaluation team lead. Thank you for being here. Welcome. Thank you. Good evening, uh, co-chairs Arco and Deshaine, members of the board, Superintendent McIntyre. Tonight, we are here to share with you again, um, our update with social
emotional learning uh, curriculum review. So the purpose of our presentation tonight is to provide with to you a summary of our social emotional learning committee's work and share with you uh the recommendation from that
committee on the K8CL curriculum based on the community input and committee feedback. We currently have two different curricula that are being uh implemented in our schools. At the elementary level, we've been using character strong and
leader and me and at middle school, we are using character strong. It should be noted that research indicates overwhelmingly that there is a positive and significant link between social emotional learning and academic achievement, which is why we selected
these evidence-based curriculum materials. At board direction this fall, we conducted a review of our social emotional learning curriculum. We gathered a social emotional learning curriculum committee that consisted of
two representatives from each cluster, an elementary parent or community member and a middle school parent or community member along with board members, teachers, principles, and the school board approved members of the community curriculum advisory committee.
That large group gathered in October and November. We also conducted parent, guardian, and teacher surveys and brought all of that information forward to the committee for review. Dr. Janna Rammer will go through the parent survey
results along with teacher survey results. Thank you so much. As Becky said, um we put together reviewed surveys prior to them being distributed with that full committee to look at the the items that were um going to be asked
and get input on those items before we finalized surveys. And then we distributed surveys to parents of elementary and middle school um students. You'll see on the graphic that the parents that rated um importance of
instruction in each of the areas as very important are depicted in blue and um the percentages of parents that rated these items as important for instruction are rated in red. Even though the survey was sent to elementary and middle school
parents, they were asked um each level at which they had children and parents of children across all levels were represented. Nearly 80% of parent respondents indicated that students receiving age appropriate instruction in the areas of problem solving and social
emotional skills was very important. Planning for the future and professional skills were rated by parents as being the lowest level of importance. However, there were still 78% of and 80% of parents respectively who rated these areas as being either important or very
important. The importance of receiving instruction and social emotional um areas overall was similar across levels in which parent respondents currently have children enrolled. We also wanted to to um present to you or show you um conversely the percentage
of parents that rated these items as not important to instruct. Um so in contrast, 5% or less of parent respondents reported that instruction in each of the social emotional areas was not important with the highest levels reported in planning for the future
which was rated at 5%. followed by teaching professional skills which was rated as 4% of parents saying that what was not important with instruction in all of the area other areas at 2% or less of parents reporting that the
instruction in these areas is not important. When we looked at the teacher survey we asked more about the implementation and the use of the materials. Um the reported values included strongly agree and agree as you're seeing on the
screen. Teachers of students across all elementary and middle school grade levels were represented in the data that um was submitted. You know the survey was sent to all elementary and middle school teachers. The majority of teachers indicated that they were able
to teach most or all of the intended lessons at 55% with an additional 43% saying that they were able to teach some of the lessons. Nearly 90% of teachers reported that the SEAL materials were easy to use and teachers agree that the
materials are age approp appropriate at 86% overall. Although there was a higher level of agreement at the elementary level than at the middle level for that item. In addition, student engagement was reported at higher levels um at the elementary than it was at the middle
school as well. And some of the common um themes and feedback um from the surveys was at the elementary level. Some of the benefits are common theme of teaching social skills, community building and that the schoolwide monthly themes with
common vocabulary which helps students apply those skills. Additional feedback that we received from the committee was to factor in some potential elementary adjustments and considerations, revisit the
instructional time allocated, increase family communication, and determine ways to lessen preparation time. At the middle level, the feedback from the committee around the benefits included teaching and problem solving
and social skills, community building and making connections. And then finally, opportunities for discussion leading to skill application after those skills have been taught. Some adjustments that were recommended from the committee were to increase
family communication regarding the character strong lessons, seek ways to increase student engagement, and provide additional training to improve the teacher understanding of the curriculum material tools. At the conclusion of the
committee's work, uh an administrative recommendation was developed. So that is what you're seeing here as option one is the recommendation from that committee. The recommendation is to continue to utilize the schoolboard approved materials and implement modifications as
noted by Dr. Wolverton and myself um with the curriculum and delivery model. A note here in option one based on um some questions and concerns we from the board. We wanted to provide you an additional layer of flexibility
within option one to change instructional time by reducing the frequency of um lesson delivery from potentially weekly to monthly at the elementary level. Some of the buildings I believe are doing it more than just weekly but we would be able to revisit
um the time allotted. Is that accurate representation? Yes. And with that we also had two other options that uh are being brought forward. The second option is to continue using the current materials
with modifications as noted as Becky had noted and enter into a curriculum materials adoption process during the 202526 school year for new SEAL curriculum materials to be implemented
in the 2627 school year. And then option three would be to eliminate purchase curriculum materials for the 2526 school year and have a district team create lessons based on the Anoka Henipin core
values portrait of a graduate to focus on school ready character development. And at this time, we are seeking board action on the recommendation for SEAL materials for the 202526 school year and beyond.
Thank you for the presentation. Board members, any um discussion? Uh Director Simon, uh thank you. Just a quick thanks for the presentation. Just a quick question first on option one and maybe I'm not remembering it correctly but when you talk about the reduced time
from weekly to potentially monthly was that based on the committee feedback or based on board concerns that you brought that forward that was not based on the committee's recommendation. Okay. So that's just an option for the board to consider if um majority of the board has a concern about the timing. Correct.
Okay. Thank you. Board members, any other discussion? Uh, Director Hulman. Thank you. Um, I was just wondering how many parents responded to the survey. Do I don't have that number? Um, but I
can get it for you. Okay. At like ballpark at all. Did just Do you have it, Becky? I don't know if it's on the material. Director Hulman, I was just reading it before this meeting in the supplemental materials that we had sent to us with all the details and
all the written responses and it was about 1,400 parent responders. Thank you. Director Adet. Yeah, if I may, I just um wanted to say that I really appreciated the option three uh solution that was put forward um where we can create our
own program that centers on the values that we have in the portrait of a graduate um which to me has um I guess an additional benefit of just consistency between our different programs and things. um you know we'll
we'll we'll gain more consistency by building around those values. Um and I think this option also proposes it to give teachers um in the classroom a lot you know more flexibility to um flex
lessons plans in and out of um you know when when they feel the class you know that they're in front of it needs it. So, for example, if if you had a class that just needed more time working on reading, um this option gives great flexibility to do that. Um and you know,
uh PL which I which I think is actually a real benefit of of what we're talking about here is the ability to say, hey, right now the focus on our room needs to be on math or on reading. um as we put all this energy and effort into um you
know right now into the uh the new reading program, I think it makes sense. So, uh for myself, I'm personally convinced that that homegrown option is what's best for our kids. Um which is why I it it has my support. So, thanks
thanks for putting that together. Uh Director Langenfeld. Thank you. Um I had the opportunity to serve on the committee um and sat with parents throughout this conversation and I and um have go deeper into the data and we
looked at it all and had those conversations. I think one of the things that that my question that I would ponder, I did not hear when we looked at the re results of the parent surveys that there were parents who had concerns
about our existing curriculum. I did hear and see from teachers that I've talked to um they and it came out in the survey as well that the time commitments and some of those uh opportunities to address um all that is on their plates
and I appreciate your comment um director in terms of what's on their plates each and every day. Um I would be certainly very much in support of looking at the time. I also did a lot of uh research on the particular curriculum
that we are using. I think one of the important things always is to make sure and it came out and actually Zach, you and I were talking about uh looking into this author and writer and expert in a lot of things and he's got a he's got a
podcast out there that talks about the importance of making sure that you have empirical evidence when you're having conversations and having kind of different perspectives on things in disagreement or or just bringing in the
empirical data. And so I I went and we had received an email of course from Character Strong folks and um talking about from their founder, I think it was John John Norland. Does that sound right? Anyway, and he talked about the
evidence-based curriculum that they're using. So then I did a lot a little more deeper dive into what their curriculum was based on and the research behind it and the evidence as well. um looking at where where it was and and
so it it made sense to me that the recommendation from the parents and I you know I did my whole doctoral dissertation on parent involvement and parent voice matters tremendously to me. Um and I am a parent and a grandparent
as well and I got into education because I was a parent and my kids were well into school when I started teaching. So that parent voice is so vitally important. And so then the question becomes we didn't offer an option three. I don't know where parents would be at
with that. But I did not see um a reason from them other than a parent who may say they they wish to not have it at all and we already offered that opt out. And then some parents said they wanted u more communication home. In fact, some
wanted to be able to extend the learning at in the family. Um, so just and I I believe I was with a middle school parent and in at my table too in our table discussions um a middle school, high school and an
elementary group there to listen to their concerns. And so I I felt that in the room there was significant support for the current programming pieces. things like they talked about kindness and and selflessness and forgiveness,
some of those important areas as well, you know. So, so right now I I I'm trying to balance it and the principles have weighed in. PTO we just heard from and they they named they talked about uh the reduction in behaviors. One school
that weighed in, the principal talked about the fact that since they've been using Leader and me, their suspensions from 2021 to 2025 dropped 13 down to two. Their room evacuations dropped significantly from 20 to zero. So you
can see that there is positive impact connected to these in their environment. So, um, as I look at this, there's no, my concern is capacity right now and there's 1,400 parents that
weighed in and their voices are there. What would it take to do option three? How would we do it? What would the capacity be? And I'm going to put something out there that we talk a lot about going rogue with content and
worried about and concerned about making sure that we have more um you know assurance that that we don't have classroom teachers. Not that classroom teachers would would you know typically do this but again that has
been a a conversation at this table. So I I just I look at that and say we we know we have an evidence-based curriculum currently in place. We know that there's research behind it. We know that parents overall just, you know,
most would support it. And I'm looking at do we have the capacity right now to switch gears completely for the next fall with all the literacy writing curriculum and all of those things. At
this point, I I support the the recommendation from option one, which was part of the committee and the social emotional committee based on those reasons. Parent voice matters to me tremendously. And so that would be one of the priorities when we go out and ask
parents what they think. We have to really be mindful and responsive to their voice in my opinion. So, and look at the evidence and research. Thank you members. Uh, any other discussion or
comments? Uh, Director Simon. Thanks, Casey. Um, thanks. I'm back again. Sorry. Asked a question before. Now, I'll give comments. Oh, we um, you know, the board and we all talked about this at the work session, so I know most of the public doesn't get to hear that. So, at least I'll recap my position and my
comments there. Um, so I have in my time here, um, reviewed every elementary SEAL lesson. Um, and and I think all board members were given access to that. Um, I didn't see anything controversial in
there. So, I was I'm not concerned that there's something in our current um, curriculum that is controversial. So I do not have um a concern about elementary um option one continuing
forward um with that. Um now I for secondary um at least middle school right we do something different in high school but in middle school I will say that the majority of the feedback that I personally have received is that
um that we could and maybe should do something different in middle schools. So, that's kind of where I still lean. Um, when we talked about it at the board session though, um, some board members talked about option three as a good option, and I said, um, that is
something that I could support. Um, because I think it will, if this board can come to an agreement on that, we could still give our at least elementary schools what they need and what's working for them. um and do it um in a way that does um as member Odette said
does give some flexibility in there also which I think can be important um since that meeting and um we heard a little bit here tonight but I heard it very directly maybe other board members heard it too is that um is that for courses that we've adopted late such
as the two social studies courses the psychology course and specifically I'll talk about since those other others aren't on the agenda that we will not get curriculum writers, teachers volunteering to do curriculum writing
for that. So if that's the case, option three is is not something that will go forward. So um I believe that's the case. Um I've been told that's the case, so I'm going to believe it. So, I'm not
sure even though I could support it if we have um curriculum writers, I don't think we'll have that. So, I'm not sure that voting on it really makes a difference at all tonight. Um for me anyway, for me personally. So, I think that then that brings us to, you know,
could option one pass? I I'm hesit um personally with the discussions we've had at the board. So what do we do for next year to meet state standard then state statutes if we don't right we have to have something in seal what that something is is up to the district. Um
but if option three at least for me is a it's a no-go because I don't think we'll get curriculum writers. I'm not going to give false hope to um to the public at this moment. If we can confirm curriculum writers and bring this back in the future um I might reconsider that
but tonight I can't. Um, so then if we can't adopt anything, what happens? Um, we have a current curriculum in place. Traditionally, that goes forward, but that has about $67,000 for next year in the budget, right? And I think this board has been
pretty clear that if there's something in the budget that folks don't agree on, the budget's not going to pass. So then the I guess just the logical conclusions of this discussion could affect other things, too. So, I just wanted to bring that out for the public with new
information since our work session um and kind of how the at least my process of how I think through things. So, um I could still go with option one. I would really like a review of middle schools though if if we did that. Um but I won't, you know, I won't be a stopping
point to that. Um I would just I'm going to keep saying it. Um, and then I I won't I will support option three if we can confirm curriculum writers, but as of tonight, I won't vote for it because I don't believe we will. So, I just need some assurances that we can actually
execute that option before I vote for it. So, that's at least where I'm at. Any other comments or discussion? Director Hulman. Thank you. Um perhaps do you have any
insights or thoughts of would we be able to get um people to work on that curriculum writing this summer? So I can speak um from middle school. I think it's important context for us to remember this is the second year of a
purchased curriculum. Prior to that we did use an noah henipin developed materials for um in our advisory program and there was a desire to provide consistency across all six schools ensure that we had evidence-based
curriculum that uh created the kind of fidelity that that we desire in the district with implementation. So, we have had materials in the past that were written um inhouse and uh again we're in we're we're here today because we went through
the curriculum adoption process that you've heard so much about. We explored our current materials that an nohenipin had written. We explored leader and me and we explored character strong and came forward in the spring of 2023 with a recommendation for character strong which this board approved. So long
answer to your short question. Um I think it would be extremely difficult at this point in time. I um can't say that it would be a no for sure. I I think it would be extremely challenging. The people who have expertise in writing
materials um are far few and far between. And so I I you know do we have folks that could do it and have done it before? Absolutely. Are they willing to do it now? Um, I think they have concerns about their own time ability to
do so and what happens to those materials once they're written. And excuse me, I would concur for elementary with what Becky said that we would um face the same considerations that we'd have to factor in. Parallel to
that, respectfully, it's May and some of our staff who would potentially be curriculum writers in the summer may already have mapped out their summer. So, usually when we're engaging staff in the considerations for curriculum writing and, you know, looking at that
time that they would have to set aside, we typically would map that out a little earlier. Thank you for that. Um yeah, I just definitely thinking about asking a lot of the teachers and we there's so much especially in the elementary school. They're going to be working hard on
adopting this new reading curriculum and I noticed that one of the comments on the survey was I am able to finish the lessons in the time and um 51% so that looking at half they don't have the time
right now to devote to that curriculum. So just thinking about as a big picture, how does this fit in? We want to prioritize reading and ensure that our kids are moving forward in that. We're going to need to give teachers the time
to work on that really important reading information. And so I'm trying to understand how we can juggle um this curriculum that has a cost and is um restrictive of teachers time um when we're trying to get some really good
reading things done. So, could could you just wanting to build off of that, could you remind us of the amount of time that's currently spent in both elementary and middle school on the character stronger leader in me curriculum?
At the elementary level, I I think I'm going to respond with um two parts to answering that question. One is approximately three times a week in their morning meeting time. That's when they look at that. Parallel to that, um
I know I have already started working with elementary principles on looking at the instructional schedules because what um director Hulman just spoke to is also some of the feedback that as you've noted that we're hearing from teachers, but I've been working with principles.
We're looking at our instructional schedules and our minutes. And I would say it's not unique to when I was an elementary principal or when I was a middle school principal. we don't have enough minutes in the day for everything that we would like to um be offering our students. What I am working on with our
principles and looking at our instructional schedules is now starting to also look at in relation to if the board approves the new ELA curriculum. We're looking at our minutes of instruction in relation to literacy,
math, and then also looking at the morning meeting time, which consistently every one of our 25 principles said, "Do not touch that." Teachers really need that morning meeting time. But if we're going to continue with SEAL, how and how
would that fit into that time block? And do we make as noted I think in option one, do we make adjustments in relation to the number of minutes and the lessons that we can say with confidence we can teach throughout the school year because
maybe that needs to be modified. Yeah. And just to build on that, the the essence of that item was about the length of lessons you compared to the amount of time that's allocated. Yeah. So the lessons are longer than the morning meeting time or the Becky will
talk about the advisory time that that they allocate. So pairing back those lessons was really the essence of not being able to teach them in the time allotted. And for middle school every day at middle school we begin with advisory. Uh
that is about a 20 minute block of time for a smaller group of students to connect with an adult to start their day. one day per week we do character strong lessons. Those lessons are intended to be in a longer block of time
than 20 minutes. So I don't know the breakdown of elementary to to middle school in the response to that particular question. But um it would be you know it is a challenge for them to do the lesson as designed in those 20 minutes. So the options that teachers
have is some of them shorten those lessons, some of them carry it over to the next day and span a lesson over two days. They have some of that flexibility as director had referenced earlier to match with what the needs are of their particular classroom. But that
connection time in the morning is is designated for those types of activities within our middle school schedule. Um, but one day per week is the expectation for a character strong lesson. And as Becky noted with character strong, we
would mirror that same component in relation to maybe taking a lesson and breaking it into two days versus one and fewer topics. Superintendent fewer topics. Yes. I think Director Hulen Hulman's um asking some good questions.
I think that's the path I would encourage the board to go down. So, um, you got 350 teachers that rated this at 75% actually a little higher than our reading adoption that you just voted on. You got 1,400 parents that basically put
it at 95% satisfaction. So, you got a core uh support there. I think it's frequency and duration that you can adjust if you want to. Um, because I can't give you the assurance we will have the curriculum writers to do it. Uh if we do, it's then the question of
what's the timeline and capacity. So that might have to be a long game versus uh over the sum I mean I don't believe we can do it over this this summer. Over time we could probably build an implementation plan once we get enough people and that that would just have to be some revised
um planning build building out that process. So what you if you just went from weekly to monthly for example with the two we have the teacher focus can now be on the literacy adoption. they already know this stuff. They don't have to spend any more time learning
something new. Um, and they can focus on learning the new things they got to, you know, they're responsible for around literacy. So maybe the compromise is for the next year do a reduced frequency frequency and duration allow us to focus on the literacy
implementation. Um, collect more data from the teachers from that adjustment. Uh I think you have greater fidelity if you versus creating our own. I think Dr. Langenfeld you mentioned that as well. So you can
take the workload pieces and minimize those and allow us to focus on that literacy piece. So maybe that's the common um agreement or the maybe the compromise you can have here and going from maybe three times a week even if it was monthly needed one lesson once a month. the eight lessons. All board members can
see those eight or nine lessons, get agreement on those from those two that we already have, and our teachers already know those lessons. They don't have to spend any new time because they're going to be their capacity is going to be really centered around the the new reading adoption, especially at the elementary level. So, that's
something I'd put on the tables for you to consider. It's a little bit of a twist on option one. Um I I share the same concerns with option three. I get the idea and uh um but I I think from a capacity in the system standpoint that's a harder thing to
guarantee a solid outcome on at this point. Director Adette, I'm rather shocked at how we how we um I don't know, we somehow seem first of all, we waste so much time on this program. It blows my
mind and and just shocked that we would go from a position of acting like this is so critical, but now we're willing to give it all away. We'll give we'll give up. We won't do it every day. We'll do it way less. We'll just put it off to the side. We'll give teachers the flexibility to go without it. Pretty
funny to me, actually. Um, I'm sure our survey didn't ask didn't ask parents um or didn't inform them of some of the criticisms of the program before um before it pointed asked some the questions about it. And if it had, I'm sure they might find as I have that
there are great concerns with the with the content out there. And I've I've wasted a lot of time. So, I'm not going to waste any time about it tonight other than to say to parents, if you just Google it, controversy related to social emotional learning or problems with
social emotional learning, you'll you'll find them and they are there. I I personally consider it uh what's behind these programs to be poison to our kids. I'll never vote for any of these programs aside from the the one that we create here because we can keep an eye
on it. We can we can uh we can match it to values that you know we have in our portrait that are longstanding here that uh that just make sense and um give what kids need uh which is you know they they need they need some and it's it's
valuable to give some character education to kids. There never was a problem with doing it until we went in and we tried to fix it with these programs and we haven't fixed anything. Um, we could easily go back to where we've been. Um, we have we have programs
already created. Um, they match our portrait of a graduate, I'm sure of it, or they could easily be modified to do it. So, but but at any rate, if we want to debate it longer, we can debate it longer. That's fine. Maybe I'll just add, you're right. We've
debate debated it for over a year. So, I think a lot's been said and we just there's just differences of opinion. we just disagree on it. But I would I would offer to you um if you can't get to option one writing your own and trying to do that even if it takes longer is still
better than nothing. And that's my recommendation to you as superintendent. These are important skills. Our staff and parents have shared that through the surveys we've used and I know any survey can be debated. What's the best data we have and it's been our process to collect it.
I would still say we would need to come back to you with a plan to map out option three. It's still better than doing nothing because I think it's if you want to increase achievement, this is a important piece of the puzzle. But my primary recommendation as the team and just following the committee's
recommendations is the adjustment offered in option one. Coach Arco, I do think that they are valuable skills, but I pair that with the fact that disruptive behaviors have never been worse, it seems. So, regardless of
what we think about the skills, it's not working. It may be worse if we don't, too. These are these are skills that I think are your prevention efforts, right? The research is clear. This is your prevention versus response efforts. And I've this district's prided themselves on strong prevention, strong
response, and I know we've debated that a lot as well. So I would just advise against um you know, I still think it's an important component to what our students need to achieve not just in literacy but math and the other uh academic core
areas. Uh Director Lingfeld, thank you. um a a question as we think about this and and to your point Director Adet I think that one of the things for writing your own you can customize and we talked about
that capacity is a huge issue right now we have a curriculum that um is important to our schools they already know what to do so my co and I don't want to lose sight of the middle school um that engagement is a concern and a question so then my my wonderment
and is what kind of runway or ramp would we need? So if if the process were to let continue at least at the elementary uh this coming year um what we have knowing that they already know what this
curriculum looks like. it wouldn't require a huge reset and and knowing that um because they have the literacy already in in need to do the learning as superintendent said but to to start this
conversation around portrait of a graduate. Some are much more familiar with what portrait of a graduate is. There are people who can do writing. It depends what their capacity is. Is there opportunity to
to move forward because we are required by state law with what we know and then at the same and be responsive to our our parents and our community at this time. But then also take into account that we
would, you know, look to to continue that process to to move and do writing through the school year to be able to have that in place. I I just think the capacity piece and going out for today, this is what we know, but I believe that
there could be some input certainly um in middle school and and um move that forward. So, I guess what I'm looking at is can can we amend an option that would continue uh elementary um
and possibly uh secondary as well for this moment, but then um engage with an agreement that we would move forward with this writing during the next school year to be in place for the following school year. I just I just think that
this is an important conversation that and the the writing is going to matter, but we have to give our team time, our staff time. And right now, we know we have evidence-based materials. We know
we have materials in place that can can address um with with fidelity and but we're going to need some time if we're going to go back to um everybody write their own kind of thing. So that's
that's a consideration. I don't know if people could get there. Another point um to add into the discussion here, we have shared around this table, just even at tonight's meeting alone, an
appreciation for evidence-based decisionmaking, an appreciation for randomized controlled trials, independent evaluators, and science focused decision- making. We've received information from both
companies, the Character Strong and the Leader and Me that are used in our schools currently about how their materials were developed. With that in mind, what I just said, trials, evidence-based, using expert information
about what students need. In addition to to your point, director Audet being supportive of the portrait of a graduate framework, character strong aligns their skills in their curriculum to the portrait of a graduate framework's college and career readiness and employer desired
competencies. They include leadership, empathy, adaptability, being a learner, a collaborator, a problem solver, a critical thinker, being curious and innovative. all of the things that have kind of come up in different discussions around this board table um tonight alone
as I think about the timing that we're at the the stated interests and appreciation for those focused areas and the way of developing curriculum that we've talked about tonight. It seems like this idea of developing our own
option while might be nice to have is a solution kind of in search of a problem. The the curriculum that we have meets all of those needs already. And to the points shared by uh director Langenfeld, Simon and our superintendent as well as the team in front of us today about
capacity, we we as a board are putting a lot of stress in our system. lot of decisions are being made and changed and delayed that are now backing us up into this capacity concern. It seems um it seems unnecessary to to ask
for one more thing when we have all of the access to all of the materials. Um I know I've also looked at all of the materials and have no concerns. Our our families and and community members can Google anything they want and find out. There are national stories. There could
be um districts in different places that they could find information on and be concerned about based on those stories. I am certain that that exists out there. But that is not true and that is not happening in Anoka Henipin and we need to acknowledge that. Um these programs
are serving students well. We've asked for parent feedback, teacher feedback. We should trust our process. And for those reasons, um, I support staying with what we are currently doing. I'd be open to a discussion about timing, but you know, wasting so much time in
this when it's three times a week at elementary at morning meetings, which are like 15 20 minutes long um, and once a a week in middle school for 20 minutes. When we know that evidence shows students having strong social
emotional skills that we just read about, right? problem solver, critical thinker, sets them up for academic success and creates the opportunity for more learning. Um, I think I think we need to stick with with what we've already put so much time and energy
into coach Jericho. Um, sorry, I totally lost my train of thought. I Well, give me a second. Um so I had the opportunity to um attend
the social emotional learning uh committee that was discussing this. The reality of the situation is that I I was more well I think director Langenfeld and I were more observers than anything which is great. got to see a lot, but most of the the parents and the adults
that showed up to participate didn't have a real familiarity with SEAL and which is fine. Everybody, they know what they know. If you don't know what it is, that's totally fine. So, part of the committee was to tell them essentially what it is, introduce it to them. And I think director alluded to this, but I
certainly witnessed it. It's just the reality of how it played out is if you put a group of adults in a room that don't know anything and then tell them how to think about something and then ask for their opinion, there's really only one opinion they can offer and that's the opinion we got. Second thing, just to respond to something else you said, you had mentioned that the
companies had given us feedback on their curriculum. Well, sure they did, but if you ask any company that sells any product if we should buy their product, you're only ever going to get one answer. And then the third inconsistency that isn't adding up to me is at the last work session we had discussed you
know the the idea of purchasing several other textbooks and writing curriculum for a lot of other classes presumably if we were going to do that all the resources would be there to write the curriculum. I find it impossible to believe that if we have the resources for that now had we just voted on it
that they're not there to write. While it might be true that maybe the there's certain teachers or staff who have a specialty inCA, I'm certain that our curriculum writers are talented enough to write a homegrown program, even if that's not necessarily their specialty.
So, we certainly do have the staff. We have the resources. And yeah, I I don't see any reason why we're not doing option three. Director Lingfeld, I um will completely disagree that the parents in the room had no idea what SEAL was. I I was in
the same room with you and the discussion was around they were identifying the skill sets that their children were learning in in the classes. So um the people that were sitting at my table were very engaged and
could participate fully. Um so I my takeaway was extremely different and experience in that room that night those two meetings. So I just want to I just if parents are listening for those who had attended u please know that um I
felt you had a a a significant understanding of what your children are learning and understood the curriculum. In fact, um you know, again, families had asked specifically if they could even have it sent to their homes because
they felt it would be so important to um and shared um anecdotal stories about their children coming home and talking about different core values that they had learned and talked about. and um they wanted to at home continue and
ensure that the language and the you know the same terminology was used and and definition. So that was my experience in the same room. So I'll just leave it at that. I just think if parents hear that I I I want to acknowledge that the people that I heard
knew what social emotional learning was. Just to reiterate, the survey itself went out to all elementary and middle school parents, not just the people in the room as well. Thank you, Director Simon. Thanks, Casey. Um,
so again, just speaking for myself here, but um I don't and I'm going to I'm going to I guess call out or maybe agree with one board member here, but I I don't think that what member Odette said is um
unreasonable. I think it's a reasonable position. He's You've been completely clear on this. You're absolutely right. Um, and I think that the discussion prior, at least what I heard, I'm not putting words in your mouth, but what I heard was, um, the curriculum we have is
tied to, um, a national company that gives agreement or standards or what have you for this, whether they asked for it or not, um, they were linked to it. And I think that if the public um, Googles that, they'll probably find exactly what member Odette said. So, I
don't think that's unreasonable. As a matter of fact, maybe I don't find it unreasonable because I've been in the same position in years past when things have been brought forward that have been tied to national groups, if you will, and I voted against them. So, I I don't think that's unreasonable. What I did in
this, and Mary, you'll remember on curriculum instruction assessment committee when this was first brought forward, um um I think I was maybe the only one at the time, but I was like, we need to see I need to see all the lessons. And you gave access to it, right? not just for me but everyone on
that curriculum and instruction assessment committee because I wanted to at least for my own personal um my own knowledge understand that what we were bringing forward was not that I don't think anyone in the public would consider controversial. So so
specifically what we're doing in an noaipin I reviewed that and I did not feel that way. Um and then I just want to clarify. So a lot was talked about capacity and I agree with all of it, right? I think capacity is an issue. What I was referring to on the feed
specific feedback I received since our work session was what we heard tonight from the teachers that came that um that they have gone through you know our robust curriculum adoption process have brought forward recommendations not just
onCL but on social studies and all these others and that um our board as a group does not agree to that and and give them direction of okay now write an option for this case seal or go back and meet
the past standards with the new book. What I have heard specifically is that we will not get cooperation because of that. So, so at least for me at this moment, I mean I would propose. I'm not going to because I don't think it would go forward. But
um I would be okay with option three if we said we amend it and say if we don't get curriculum writer teachers, we'll continue doing what we do. I don't think that will pass. So I'm not going to suggest it. But um but so I I think that voting for
something that I do not believe has any realistic possibility of going forward just doesn't make sense. So in the in the future if um if we find from our leaders that hey we have some great experts who are willing to write curriculum I'm fine
bringing it back but tonight I don't believe that's the case. Uh coach Arco. All right fine. How about we do an amended version of option three and if no one can be found then we will do I believe it's option two which is
minimizing the amount of time because one of the biggest complaints brought forward by teachers is they don't have the time that was like number one thing I heard from teachers at the at the committee. So how about that something like that I would propose not necessarily make a motion at this time
but I'd just offer that board members. Any further discussion on these ideas? Director Simon. So, I'll answer Zach directly. No one's jumping in. Um, I am fine with if we amended option three if
you're in for this. I think this is what I heard, but this is what I'd be before. Um, amend option three that if we do not um if we cannot execute the curriculum writing that we will continue um option one with the review of timing. I think
that's what you said. So, I'm for that. I would vote for that. Can I uh I would add to that just to be a little more specific. If um curriculum writers aren't found, then we would do what Cory had proposed and switch it from I think
I heard like three times a week to once a month or sorry three times a month to once a month or do the less but still continue with what we have just do it less assuming curriculum writers can't be found. Um the the only thing I'd like to do is
um say yes, we can I I would I would agree with um looking at less time. Um but leaving the flexibility up to the teacher. We talked about flexibility. If their specific classroom needs more of it in their expert opinion, um I want to
make sure I give that flexibility to them. So not sure if that works for you, but that's what I'd be okay with. So, I just have a question for the whole board. What exactly happens if no options pass? Um, it's my understanding that if we do
not vote to rescend a previous board decision or vote to adopt a new decision that would replace the existing, then the existing umCCL decision would stand like what we're currently doing would remain.
So normally I would agree. I guess the reason I asked the question is because I thought the reason we're in this position is because we did formally agree to go down a new path that involved this investig investigative process. So it seems like because we
agreed to that which had the assumption that there would be an outcome. I don't this is why I'm asking I don't think it would apply in this situation. I don't think we would default to what's currently being done. Does anybody else have any thoughts on that? Were you raising your hand? I'm sorry. I
couldn't tell Director Aette. I gave the thumbs up. I was strongly agreeing with Mr. Aro about that. Okay. Director Simon, I think that was the general discussion about entering into this process that this board would find a way forward, right? So, I think that
was the general discussion. I think that um and I mentioned this early on um so if we don't right I mean if we don't figure out what to do and we don't do anything then I guess we invite the state in to look that we're not meeting
state statute right I don't know what that means right they don't come in but this is a public meeting so I guess I just said it so the state would know we're not meeting state statute um and if we did continue forward um like you had suggested did um because that was
the previous decision. Then I think this board, like I said, and I did the research, just under 67,000 will be spent on what we did last year for next year, and that would be in the budget. So then in June, I'm I'm not making a prediction, but it would be
logical to think we might not pass a budget. So I think it's a predicament. I don't I don't know where to go from there. uh coach Jericho. So I'm going to make a statement and if anyone disagrees I would like to understand why that is.
The statement is I am 100% certain that if we found an independent contractor in the occurrence that no one in the district wanted to write the curriculum, we paid the independent contractor and gave them a portrait of a graduate that they could write the curriculum to that and they would have
no opinion one way or the other about what's happened previously in the district with curriculum adoption. So, is anything I just said false there, Superintendent McIntyre? Probably very true and probably very expensive as we're staring down many millions of
cuts. So, it's not a path I'd encourage the board to go down because I think um it's much more cost-effective and get more buyin for our own staff to write it. So, I'd rather figure out a longer term plan to do it internally. I just think you're asking for a very I don't know. We haven't done that.
Um, that's just my fear is it could be cost prohibitive, but we'd have to figure that out. I I would rather see we the bottom line is board, we need a decision because we don't know what we're doing next year and it's we got a month of school left.
So, at some point, I'm encouraging you to pick one of the options so we at least know we what we have to do like starting tomorrow as far as organizing and planning. And you heard teachers say earlier, they're planning their summers if they haven't already.
Um, so I' I'd rather not push the decision down the line. We've pushed it for a year already. Coach Era, I would like a quote on what that would cost from a contractor who'd be willing to do it if we can't find anyone in the district before I'd be
willing to vote on anything other than option three. Well, our quoting process, I don't know if Michelle's in the room, that's typically if we're following protocol or policy, that's an RFP process, which can take days or weeks. That doesn't help us in the short
term. That like I think we got to do that in a in a certain way. I mean, I Yeah, Director Simon, go ahead. I I I don't mean to I'm not jumping on what you said. I'm just going to add to it. I think that you don't have to do a
formal quote. You can get you can figure out is this possible and about how much it would have cost instead of like I think I think that would be I think that would be reasonable for a a board member asking for that. I think you could get without a formal quote you could
probably get something and then um Corey your your comment about vote on something. I I just I don't know. I I don't feel good about voting for an option that I think we cannot execute. I
I that doesn't make sense to me. So, I agree with you. I would love to vote on something, but I don't want to vote on something with a hope and a prayer. I want to vote on something I know we can execute. And tonight, I don't think we can. So, I'm I'm just not going to vote on that tonight. I I in the future, if
you can guarantee me or we can find that we're going to do it, um we can I can reconsider. I just offer the board, mayor, you can correct me if I'm wrong. Our contracts are expiring if they haven't already. I think pushing our board meeting back a week put I mean not that they can't be
renegotiated but they it's different at the two levels. At the elementary level for character strong we're locked in until August for the three schools that are leader in me their contracts are up in May. Um Director Langenfeld. Um, as I as I
look at option two, continue the current materials with modifications as noted and that would be the timing piece. Correct? And then enter into curriculum material adoption process. Um, that could be not an adoption process. It
could be the writing. It could be the new cell curriculum in 2627. the the the concern I go back to is I want to be sure that what we're bringing forward to our students reflects exactly what number three is intended um that
the team gets the local flavor to and and I would be concerned quite frankly about an outside person who has no no attachment to this district. One of the benefits of our own curriculum writers is because they know this district and
it's a unique district and and so that would be the wonderment if if people could get behind that with that recognition. I just truly believe that there is going to be time needed if we are going to develop our own curriculum
materials at this late date based on what two things new learning and the writing pieces. Those two pieces alone are going to give us a long on-ramp that are I we won't be ready by fall. I mean, I'm I'm I'm
looking at it from my own experiences um as a as a person who has been in education and was there for 30 years. So, I know this takes time if done well and right. And I don't think anybody here wants it not done well and right.
I'll just stop at that. But top two would be an option if you would look to, you know, combine three with it and it give us that space. Coach Jericho. So, as I'm thinking this through, I think there are two fail safes in place.
The first one, it sounds like we've done this in the past. So, the district has written curriculum. I would be stunned if that curriculum was thrown in the garbage, so to speak, and we don't have it anymore. So, I'm sure it still exists. Um, so there's a chance we don't have to have any curriculum written at
all. We could just look at what exists, modify it as we see fit. And then the second thing, just to frame this properly, there is a 100% chance, not a 99%, a 100% chance that a curriculum writer external to the district would
write curriculum. Just depends on the cost. Now, you might not like the cost. You might not agree to the cost, but I'm certain there are contractors, there are businesses, whoever that would do something like this. It's just a matter of are we willing to pay for it. Right now, I heard the number thrown out. were paying $67,000 a year for the current
programs. So I would say at an absolute minimum if they were willing to do it for $67,000 or less, it's a wash. It's act it would in a sense be no cost or the same cost. So fail safe number one, we've got curriculum already we can use.
Let's look at that. Fail safe number two, at a minimum, let's get an actual price before we just dismiss the fact that we could do that. And then of course perhaps the most important piece of all we don't actually know for certain. No one's willing to write it. We just have a hunch that that might be the case. And if it is that's too bad I
guess but that's what the other two options are for. Uh, Becky Rodier, to your point, uh, co-chair, middle school does have materials that we used previously. Um, that the lift for middle school to, I
think, did you say dust those off at whatever phrase you used? Um, would would likely be less than what it would be at elementary. Um, and so, you know, that might be something for you to consider. Not that it's my place here to give you another option, but I don't
think that's possible at elementary. Elementary is uh when you noted um the curriculum that's been written, that was only at the at the middle school level, not at the elementary level. So, if you wanted to separate your action, middle school and elementary, I
think maybe you were referring to that to director Simon potentially. and that that wasn't part of the recommendation, but if that was something that you would agree to to move us forward, might be something worth discussing.
Uh, coach, so I I do certainly want to meet the state requirements for this. Also, keeping in mind that they don't specify what specifically or how much of it you have to use. That's an important piece. Um, it's good to hear that there might be an option for the elementary one.
Again, we can standardize it for all the elementary schools. And if it sounds like we're to do it like once a month or whatever the recommendation was, it's only a total of eight lessons. I just I can't foresee how writing eight lessons. Maybe I'm just unbelievably naive here. I don't see how that would
cost more than $67,000. Maybe it does. Maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I I don't foresee that being terribly expensive. It's eight lessons. Uh Director Simon 67. I mean, I think elementary we're locked in at Zack asked for a quote. I think we should I think No, we are I I support following up on
that. I think my concern was mentioned not necessarily about um about the cost. I bet you could get it done for that. I I don't know, but I mean it's logical. Um my concern is the buyin from the staff, right? like you have your experts
in your district writing um getting feedback from their colleagues and um many hands and um we can certainly do something from a top down and push it down but then what kind of buyin are you going to get? What type of results are
you going to get? And I know that before we had um a set curriculum in middle school, even before it was written by the the the staff that did, middle schools did different things. And I think that you have the opportunity. I
know you have the opportunity to get much more of what you don't want. So, um yeah, that's all I got. Uh just a a quick question. Um I know where director Audet stands on this but
just curious uh director arco if your main concern is related to castle um on character strong and leader in me and the fact that castle said that the curriculums were uh evidence-based and research
driven. Is that is that why you'd like to find a consultant? Um, so we've had a lot of discussion about this. Maybe there's a lot I could say, but maybe I'll say this is when you have, as director has pointed out, when you have curriculum that is per, and I
think director Simon has said this as well, is perceived to be controversial, whether it is or it is not. We can debate that back and forth endlessly. Um, it's good just for the integrity of the school to have something that there is no controversy over, even if the controversy isn't warranted. If we have
an option that there's no controversy surrounding it, which is like a homegrown option, that's just a win across the board in my opinion. We're still meeting state requirements, I we're still doing like I I don't see the downside to it other than the the possible cost, but even
that I don't foresee as terribly high. Okay. So, we've learned through all of the times we've been talking about this that Castle can come in to anybody's curriculum. They look at it without an invitation and they can decide if it's meeting evidence-based standards or not.
How would we prevent any consultant that we would maybe find from being castle aligned? How would we prevent Castle from coming in and looking at a homegrown self-written curriculum and saying, "Yeah, that's evidence-based and research driven." Because, you know, the
folks that we would have to write that operate that way. that's like the natural way to operate when you're writing a curriculum or developing something is to use evidence-based research focused um practices. So, I just I you know, again, I feel like
we're finding a solution uh for a problem that doesn't exist. Like there's not a problem that we need to solve aside from perception and we have the facts and the evidence to correct that perception, that misperception. Coach Arco. So again, just going back to
how any kind of business works there. Anyone who we're paying to do a job is going to do the job according to the criteria we specified to them. So I'm not really concerned about that. We don't want castle standards. Just say, "Hey, here are the standards we do want. Don't use these over here." I don't even think you need to say that second part. Just say only do these standards and
that's what they'll produce. And there's an interesting conundrum though, like the idea of because it's a fair concern. The idea of getting more of what you don't want. There's an implication buried in there that what's happening in the
classroom is not what we think it is. And maybe that's true, maybe that's not, but that's a troubling implication, I guess. So, I I would rather just do what all of the people commenting here have said and trust the teachers and know that if we give them a curriculum to use
that they're going to faithfully execute it. Uh, Director Simon. Oh, wow. My mic's still on. Um, so I think I mean we're going around and around and around. I think people are where they are and I don't think it's I think we've always been where we
are, right? So, I don't think it's going to change. So, um not to uh I I wonder just how we move forward, right? Is it possible to table the I know superintendent does not love that but is it possible to table this until we have
a not a not a official quote but at least an idea on is there an outside person about how much might that cost. um if we can get feedback on can will we have um folks who are qualified our our
teachers and our staff who are qualified and can write this if they're willing to write it. I think if we get those two answers um it may help direct us. So I'm just going to suggest that and then a few options were sent out. I guess I'll
just speak for myself. Um, I'm okay with Michelle's option of I I might be misquing you, but option two, which is continue what we do for one year and then look at it potentially writing or an adoption, right? So, I'm fine with
that. Um, I'm also fine with a revised option three of um if we can find writers, great. If not, we'll continue doing what we did um this year. So, at least that's where I'm at right now. I'm fine with either of those or tableabling
to get more information. Thanks. Um, does anyone else have a perspective they would like to share to close us out to decide if we're going to make a motion or if we're going to table? Director. Make a motion to
table. I make a motion. I move to table. Second. Okay. We have a motion to table from director Audet and a second from director Simon. Is there any discussion? Uh, Coacher Argo. Yeah. And at the risk of sounding ignorant and
naive, I really don't think I'm just putting this out there. I really don't think asking contractor or group to write eight lessons should cost $100,000. Could be way off base there, but seems like it shouldn't have cost that much. So, I'm looking forward to seeing the
quote. Um, I just sense it will be reasonable compared to what we're currently paying. Just want to throw that out there. Director Lingenfeld, point of just a point of clarification. Um to table it would mean
that more information would be found that could change some minds. That's what it sounds like. That's what it sounds like. And then there's a belief that there would be four votes. Is that Well, maybe I mean it's I Yeah. I mean,
uh, Superintendent McIntyre. Well, maybe let's set a target then. Try to bring you back something for the May 19th board meeting. I'll see what we can find for information between two weeks from now on what getting you all to agree on the contractor might be tricky as well, but
we'll see who's out there and we'll also be able to poll our staff to see can we do it internally. Like we should be able to get a sense for that and bring it back to you on the 19th and more information. Right. And and with that information, um if I could I'm sorry.
Um, I would really like to know how much learning then would be required for our teachers and their capacity to take on new learning at at the same time, especially at elementary. I have grave concerns. That is a huge concern right
now for me is to take on a new curriculum at this time. And that's why option two seemed to see be a reasonable situation right now to give that on-ramp of people to be able to do the writing. I I really am concerned about that and
again we have the support right now to move with the current curriculum for another year. I feel we have it and can if if this is the route that people wish to go, we really really need to be
mindful of the teachers time. I I I just I look at that and so I would not be in favor of tableabling it right now. Uh coach, yes. Okay. Any further discussion on the
motion to table? All right. Uh, I'll second if Oh, director Simon already seconded. So, thank you. Um, okay. Would all those in favor of tableabling say I? I. I. Those opposed say no. No. With four in favor
of tableabling and two opposed. Um, this is tabled till May 19th. Okay. Thank you. All right, our next agenda item is labor relations and benefits with item 10A, the
202627 calendar committee proposal. We welcome Dr. Jennifer Cherry, executive director of human resources and Todd Menink, director of labor relations and benefits and uh Val Holtus, the president of the Inoca Henipin Education Minnesota.
Oh, she is going to come up. Welcome. Thank you, co-chair uh Deshaine, members of the board, Superintendent McIntyre. Uh we were here in April at the work session to um present a first read of uh
the calendar uh for the 20 um 26 2027 school year. This um calendar that we're going to be presenting this evening is uh comes at the recommendation of our calendar advisory committee. The
committee is made up of uh 30 members uh that represent teachers, pareducators, principles and various district administrators. uh the committee works under a set of parameters in establishing a proposed
calendar each school year. Some of the particular items are um related to state statute for the number of uh hours of instruction that are required each school year. the length of the school year, the time of
the school that the school year can start, our state holidays when school cannot be held, as well as um state holidays um where our district must be closed. Uh we also are um uh considerate
of our employment contracts uh specifically our teachers work 187 days each school year. This includes 4 days for conferences with families. Our para educators work all student contact days and then in addition to that they also
have a day of orientation before the first day of school according to state statute and staff development days uh during the school year. One for secondary pareducators and two days for our elementary
pareducators. Uh we also are cognizant of multiple employee groups who have uh other um uh contract dates um such as multiple employee groups have two days off during spring break for uh
designated holidays. Uh we also in consideration of developing our school calendar look at the instructional days and um ensure that they are spread equitably across the three trimesters. Uh we strive to avoid two day school
weeks or um days where um uh we have uh we avoid all uh weeks where there is only one day of school. Um during even numbered school years um we do pay attention to election day as our school
sites are utilized as polling places um and are considerate of building security considerations. And so with that, I'm going to ask Heather to um just display the calendar for us. It's
in your packet board um for your review. Um when we're looking at the 2627 school year, she doesn't know. Oh, okay. Um uh board, it is in your packet. Uh when we were looking at the
2627 school year, one of the major considerations is uh Labor Day. We always start the day after Labor Day and um in September 7th of 2026. It's the latest possible date that can ever occur in a calendar. So this year we're
starting this is the year we would start school very late in the year. Um the other um adjustment to the calendar that the committee considered this year was the timing of those fall conferences uh
at the elementary level. uh shifting that a little bit later into October. And so we do have a a conference day where there is no school for elementary students. There are school for secondary students on October 26th. Um moving into the timing of
spring break and the t I'm sorry, the timing of winter break and the timing of spring break are generally the next two big considerations. Um for us because the uh school year is starting so late into September, our trimester ends on
December 3rd. That's after Thanksgiving uh during this calendar year, which pushes the whole calendar just a little bit later into the year. Uh during winter break, uh it begins on December 24th, which is a holiday, and goes
through January 1st. So that means that winter break would start on a Thursday in December and uh school would resume on January 4th of which is a Monday of this year. Uh there are holidays for um uh in
January for Martin Luther King Day uh and in February for President's holiday. Uh, another consideration which was a a large consideration for us this year was uh the um the timing of the end of the
second trimester and a date that uh we were cognizant there were uh very large concerns about attendance uh for a group of our students um uh recognizing the
Eid holiday. And so March 10th is listed as a non-school day. That would be a professional development day for teachers. Um and uh that would leave us a day uh in the middle of the week with
the trimester ending on March 12th. Spring break would occur at the end of March, similar to what is um on the schedule for the 2526 school year. So it would occur the last week of March
into the first week of April. Uh and um and then this results in the last day of the school year on June 10th. Um and um the rest of the the uh teachers with
their last workday on June 11th, the Friday of that week. Uh so again, the calendar that is being proposed is in your packet. It has been um presented to the board previously at a work session. Uh we um have uh made multiple
considerations for again balancing the number of school days throughout the trimesters. And um this evening we're open to any questions you might have. But before I do that, I'm just going to look at my tablemates here and see there were some of additional items that I
missed or that you wanted to make sure were covered. I think you covered it. Okay. Thank you for that presentation. Board members, any questions or discussion about this calendar committee proposal? Okay. Uh, Director Simon, no questions.
Just a thank you. This is um it's work that you don't often get thanked for, right? Because everyone or many people will have a concern with it. But um I think what you brought forward is just very reasonable and logical. So thank you for all the work.
Can I just make a quick comment? Director Simon, thank you for that um comment. That is um a uh something that we definitely acknowledge within the committee. I think that is mentioned as we consider contemplating moving days
around. Um, this is a hard committee for our staff to be on because they know that the decisions that are made here will be criticized. Um, there is never going to be 100% agreement about any of these these choices. So, thank you for
the acknowledgement. Thank you. Uh, members, any other questions or discussion? All right. Right. If not, before us is the 2026 27 calendar committee proposal as presented in appendix Q. Is there a motion to approve
the calendar proposal as presented? So moved. Thank you, Director Langenfeld. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, co-chair Arco. Any further discussion? Hearing none, would all those in favor say I? I. I. Any oppose say nay. With six in favor and zero
opposed, this passes. Thank you. Thank you, board. All right, board. Our next uh discussion is the 202526 health insurance rates first read. Um we welcome uh Dr. Jennifer Cherry and Todd
Mensing to stay with us and bring up the rest of the team. Welcome. Okay. Thank you again, co-chair Duchaine, members of the board, Superintendent McIntyre. Uh this evening Todd and I are here along with our consultant from AON. This is Josh
Johnson. He's the senior vice president of health solutions. Um throughout the presentation tonight, we're going to be very focused on um trying to create some uh awareness about our self-insured
district um uh plans for health and dental. And we also are going to share information around the health of our health plan um as we are charged with setting the premiums um that continue to
fund the plan that's offered by the district. Uh so with that I am going to hand it over to Todd and he'll um uh set this up for us. All right. Great. Uh so as a self-insured employer uh we set our
own insurance uh uh we uh we pay our own insurance claims and then we have to set rates to ensure we have uh we our our premiums are high enough uh to cover the claims and other expenses that are involved in administering our plan. If
we were to just purchase insurance as other employers do, we would be given a rate by the insurer. because we're self-funded, it's the job of the board um to approve the rate based on those considerations every year. Um so uh we established the premiums again to cover
claims and medical expenses. Uh we have our consultants from AON. Josh is representing AON today. Um providing analysis to establish a rate recommendation for the board. Um, and in that analysis, they look at claims projections, administrative fees,
stop-loss insurance, which is uh insurance that we hold in the background that covers anyone who has claims over $500,000 in a year. Um, so last year we had 11 individuals who had more than $500,000 worth of claims, which is why
you're going to see large increases this year. One of the major reasons. Um and so we do have additional insurance to cover that cost and and that we do have to um pay for. We also have aggregate stop-loss which covers if all of our
claims exceed 125% of what's expected. Uh although we we've never been in a situation where we've actually had to use the aggregate insurance, but we have it just in case. Um so and then any other discounts or other costs
associated with the administering of the plan are included there. Um so with that we're going to start with dental rates uh because they're they're quite a bit similar similar and we'll move to Josh as he goes through the uh actuarial
information about um and that the underwriting information. Okay. Thanks. Uh what you see here is a underwriting projection for dental claims um projecting historical claims from the most recent 24 months. So you have two 12-month periods trended
forward at the the prevailing market rate in dental health insurancees is 4%. So you take these two we take these two historical periods trend them forward to the projection period that would start in September. Um and then come up with a weighted average essentially these two experience periods. The result of that
is $9345 per employee per month. And then the Delta Dentl's admin fee is $4.85. So based on this projection, the total required cost is
$98.30, which is about 15.6% increase over the current budget rate. So that's the rate you see on the top right in the current plan year total premium rate of 85 um which has been for the last several year years set somewhat below the
projected cost because of reserves that Todd is going to talk a little bit more about. Um the bottom right of the of the slide there illustrates that without any increase for the coming plan year, we're estimating that um about $800,000 of
that reserve would need to be used um without an increase. All right. So, um, uh, again, due to our high fund balance, especially after COVID, um, during COVID, our our
fund balance went from a little over a million to a little over 2 million, and we really only need a fund balance of about 900,000 about two months of claims. So, we've been we haven't changed the rate in several years and we've been gradually um spending down
that that fund balance and it's projected to be back um uh at about 1 and a.5 million is where I I'm expecting it to be at the end of the year. Um so again they remain higher than uh uh the the reserves remain higher than the
suggested target level but they are projected to fall below that target level in 2026 if we don't have an increase. Uh so we're project we're suggesting a $5 increase this year and there will likely be another increase next year. Um, but rather than put it
all in one year, since we do have more fund balance to to spend down, we're we're suggesting increasing that premium from $85 to $90. Uh, just so you know, with most of our groups, the district contribution is $80. Uh, so, you know, depending on the
rates that are negotiated, if if they negotiate no increase, the employees would take on that extra $5. Otherwise, they could negotiate an increase in their contributions and maybe see no increase. All right, with that, we'll move into health insurance. Just a sorry, any
questions on dental before we move to health insurance just so we could keep them together. Okay, go ahead. One thing I'll also note, Josh could confirm, dental is not as volatile as health insurance. there's a there's a cap on the amount of insurance you can have in
a given year. So, it doesn't need to maintain as big a reserve as health um because it just doesn't fluctuate as much. All right, so moving on to health insurance. And actually, I have the first slide here. Uh so this first slide just shows our current uh health
insurance plans just to remind you because I know you haven't dealt with this since last year at this time but we do have a co-pay plan which is kind of our old plan design. We you know if you go back 15 years all of our plans had no
deductible co-ayments between $2500 and $100. They were probably 20 to 100 back then. Um and just a wide open network where you can pretty much go to any doctor. Uh that's a really expensive plan design and we do maintain that and
you can see we have about 700 721 single and 222 family on it. Most of our employees have moved to a deductible plan. Uh and so we have three options um using the same 8020 deductible design
and it really depends on the network. So choice is a broad open access network that allows people to go wherever they they want. Um but then we also have narrower networks that are more affordable um that are and so uh
Medicica is able to negotiate better discounts uh and they're able to coordinate care better to keep prices down. So so those electantage plus because you're choosing a narrow network are able to provide you with a a lower premium. um your and uh but but all
three of those plans have a basic uh plan design that has a $1,500 deductible for single and a 3,000 deductible for family. And then there's a 20% co insurance that kicks in um after you've hit that deductible until the out-of-
pocket maximums, which aren't shown on here, but they're $3,000 and $6,000. Um 3,000 single and 6,000 family. Uh there's also an out-of- pocket maximum on the co-pay, but no one ever hits it, so it's it's not too
important to talk about. Todd leaves it to me to read the to tear the band-aid off here. So, the projected increase for 25 to 26 is 22%. So, and that also, we'll talk about this more, but that includes um somewhat of a load to get the reserve level back to where
it needs to be or start moving in that direction. So, 22% total increase, which equates to about $295 per employee per month or 15.3 million annually. Um the underlying market trend assumptions that are baked into those projections are 8% medical, 13%
pharmacy, which is a weighted average of 9.3%. So essentially what you have is, and we'll look at this more in the next slide, but very high drug trends due to specialty medications and GLP1s that I'm sure everyone's heard about. Um, and
then some just very poor experience that we'll look at in the next slide in the second half like immediately after rates were set for this current plan year. So larger like higher market trends on top of already over budget in the current year is leading to this required large
increase. Casey, Director Simon. Thanks. Thanks, Casey. I don't know if we could just jump in, but it might be easier just to jump in. So, to clarify because we did re receive some emails from employees. Um, so that
22% is kind of looking at the overall plan, that's what we need to be able to have enough money to play pay claims, right, in general. But an individual's experience is going to be different, right? So like an individual on a certain plan is not going to
necessarily be a 22% increase in what they're paying it. In some cases it's up to like 50% or I don't know the exact numbers but it's much higher than 22. That is correct. Right. I want to make sure that the folks listening to us don't think my insurance is only going
up what my experience will be is 22%. Yeah that's correct and we cover that. We'll cover that in later slides, but the the reality is that the district covers the majority of the insurance right now. And for some plans with single for one of the plans, we
currently cover 100% of it. Um so ultimately the employee is going to since the district contribution is not currently budgeted to go up as much as you know the premiums but expected to go up, the employee share is going to go up
by more than that. And I know you'll get into all of that in detail. I just want to make sure on this specific slide, if folks who are on the healthcare plans look at your individual experience, the your individual increase
will not necessarily be 22%. It could be higher than that. That's correct. Thank Director Langenfeld. I I'm looking at uh the key observations drug trends and I'm hoping I'm asking this question
accurately looking at the formulary. I I'm not sure I understand what where we're at in terms of specialty medications and what the district does in that space. So I probably need something side to tell me what how we're
why where we're performing and how that works in Oka Hannipan. I haven't had that conversation here. So, just wondering about about the last time we looked at that and what kind of results.
Are you asking about like the prescription options? I the prescription options and how broad and Okay. Yeah. And if the district has had a hand in like deciding what's in or out of the list. Right. Exactly. And looking at the GLP. Yeah. You know, that kind of thing.
I know. I know it shows up later, but I just I just wondered about uh the specialty medications. I mean, I know that some of them are extremely expensive and and I'm not suggesting we should change it. I'm just wondering when it was looked at last and and if
there's any relief there as well or consideration, you'll probably get to this in a minute, but some of these are negotiated things. So, okay. I So, that's helpful, right? Well, it is helpful because it wasn't in my previous world. Yeah, we didn't
negotiate this. So, this particular item number one here in the key observations, um I hear a real mixed bag amongst districts who agree to cover it or agree to not cover it. Sure, that makes sense. I that's very helpful. Thank you for get to that. But yeah, that's an important
note that it's a negotiated item to a point that by statute uh we can't reduce the aggregate value of benefits um without negotiations. It's a it's
well and yeah I understand what you're saying now. I appreciate the clarification. Having come from a state where we didn't negotiate them, it makes sense. Just saying. Please carry on. Thank you. I think we can go to the next slide.
So, as I mentioned on the previous slide, um what we're illustrating here is this is so this is per employee per month claims levels uh by month for the last several years. So really what you look at the the red arrows is what we're
highlighting in this this past year about this time setting rates for this current plan year. um we were at that red arrow February 2024 um the in UHC year two so that red arrow um and then you see what happened to the
clamps after that month right so that's really what we're dealing with here is that it it just really ramped up right after kind of the period where you we're using the most current available claims at the time and then claims just really ramped up and didn't really level off
until January February this year um So about a 20% trend over that period. So as I mentioned before, it's because of this we're running or you're running over budget during the current year and then you have to apply the future trend into the next uh the next plan year and
that's where we're getting to the 20 22% um projected required increase. Superintendent McIntyre, could you try to clarify? Is this volume of claims and or I think of volume and I think of just
higher costing claims. It's more severity than volume. Okay. Thank you, Director Simon. Okay. That's where the large claims and the specialty medications come in. It's it's higher cost, not necessarily higher
units. Coach Ero. Okay. So, since it's severity of claims, other than just doing statistics and assuming the trend continues based on those claims, is there reason to think that we'd have a similar year next year or like again
other than statistics, there's reasons to support that it was an unusually poor year at the end of the last year. um saying that that that's not going to happen continue at the current levels is really difficult to say especially with the large claims
being a a really large portion or key cost driver for the district. It's it's unpredictable. The claim levels in the last experience year were higher than what would statistically be predict predicted. Yeah, we can't guarantee that it's gonna I mean over a long period of time it should revert to the norm for
the mean, but um and then if a quick follow-up question if that's okay. Um hypothetically if the trends were to go back to what they were the year prior where without the large increase, what would then need and I know this will be a ballpark at best,
but I think I saw the number 22% increase on there. What would be the increase to cover only that rather than continuing these trends? I'm not sure I'm following. Yeah, I don't know if this answers your question, but in a normal year right now, we would say that your rates should need to go up 9.3%. That's the market
average. That's the trend we're we're using to p project forward for one year. So, that's what I would say. What was the 22% then? Is that something different distinct%? You're currently running well above what the budget rates are now. So you're at 9
10% above budget. We're projecting plus another 9% for the next year to get to approximately 20%. So So if we had stayed within budget, nothing unusual happened, we'd only be raising them by say 10%. Correct. Okay, that's what I was looking for. Thank you,
Director Simon. Um Todd and I visited on this before the presentation and you mentioned it tonight. So I think what you're talking about, I'm going to get a little more specific, is that in a typical year, we would have three to four individuals with claims over a half
a million, and last year we had 11. So that's where you're talking about the severity with specific folks. And then we also had multiple people who approached that almost like $3 million level. So that's what you're talking about with the severity of claims,
correct? Those situations. And then in addition, I know you're going to talk about like the high cost of specific medications and those increasing too. That's in addition to so that that just might help those details might help the public understand of those of our
specific experience. Thanks. If you go to the next slide, um I I so we have a the internal service fund is where we pay all the claims out of. So, um, premiums fund the the the internal
service fund and then we we pay claims out of it. Uh, on this graph, you'll see the blue and red lines there show our expenses and revenue over time. And so, you can see um they both kind of trend upwards. Um, and there's years where our
revenue exceeds our expenses and vice versa. Uh, but it ran pretty evenly until this last year. Um and so and and this uh these are numbers based on year end. Uh so I'm looking at July 1st
numbers, fiscal year end. Uh and then in green you can see our balance uh which uh which uh AON suggests should be between 24 and 30% of claims. So you can see that that alley where an is
suggesting that our our fund balance should be. So, uh, you can see we were kind of above that amount. And if you get to 2023, um, you can see we we'd fallen to sort of the middle of that range. And the rates we
set, you know, in at this point in May of 2024, given the data we had through February, were supposed to keep us in that middle of that range. But our experience just um you know between this time and the end of the fiscal year
brought us to the bottom of that range. Um and now as we project forward and so that 2025 number is still projected. It's what we're we think July one's going to look like based on our current claims experience. We're really falling
far too low far far below that that amount. Um the reality is you need about 10% just to cover claims that are incurred but not yet paid. Um and we're we're projected to be at about 5%. So we
really need to increase the reserve just to get to the point where you know we can cover all the claims that we have incurred but we haven't yet paid not even to get to um dealing with the um you know the variation in in claims in the future.
Any questions on that? The the next slide Josh will cover probably gives a a a better indication for you. I think it explains it pretty well. Thanks, Todd. Yeah, we typically call this a waterfall slide. I'm not quite sure why exactly
it's called that, but it's it's essentially the main components that go and you build in. It's a visual explanation of that 22% and what goes into it. So the 8.7% on the left side that's that's based on the trend assumptions that that I talked about the
9.3% average that equates to 8.7% in in premium because some of the other costs are fixed don't don't increase. So the cost next to that stop loss.5% of the a cost component there in
in the total. Um, and then admin fees are are flat. And then there's a there's a there's one negative that's a a decrease due to credits. Now, those the admin fee and the credits came from the RFP from last year. So, Metica quoted those favorable terms in order to secure
the business. And then the big one there is the 9.7%. Now, that's based on the essentially overbudget currently. That's the shortfall shortfall in the current budget rates. And then we're we included 4% um reserve load. So that's to contribute
towards and try to regain um the reserve that's that's running below target. And that uh rolls all up to the 22% that we've been discussing and they're the required increase without any so that's status quo without any other plan design
changes or changes to the program. Any questions? All right. Um, so the next slide's going to be about cost containment, and I'll have Josh talk about that, but I I what I want to share is we uh we met with our
insurance advisory committee a couple weeks ago. Um, so originally we had planned to meet with them. I think it was before the April 14th board meeting and then our first reading got delayed till April 28th. So we gave an uh more time to get more claims in so that they
could have a a more accurate more accurate uh numbers. Um and we consulted with Medicica and with AON regarding possibilities for plan design changes um that could bring down uh the rate
increases. And so we we did share these with the committee and we sought u feedback from the committee and we don't really have consensus among our bargaining groups. Um well well I'll talk about it. Why doesn't Josh just go over them and then we'll talk about kind of what the committee said. Okay. If you
could show the next slide please. So what we're showing here is a list of uh eight different plan options all all cart if you will. So the the top row shows the current and we're I should preface we're mainly looking at that that copay plan the really rich plan with just the co-pays kind of is what it
is. It's already high cost. Um we're looking at this this is the the plans that we can realistically adjust and get some cost savings potentially. Um the the 8020500 deductible plan. So it shows the current design at the top and then we're
just we modeled various different kind of usual suspects if you will changes. So the pharmacy co-pays is one thing that we modeled um about a.3% impact. You kind of see that a lot of these changes really don't have a a really large impact until you get down further
and start making significant changes. So, um, for example, scenario five there, I mean, that's you're going from the current 1,500 3,000 deductible scenario up to a 2,000 4,000 and then also increasing the out- of- pocket max. That'll get you a little over 2%
reduction in the projected total. Um, the next one down, co insurance, that's so that's in network co insurance is 20% currently that the member pays. If you moved that to all the way to 30%, it's only.3% impact. Um, if you kind of the
the scenario seven is is rolling up four different of these major changes would would be about a 3.1% or 2.2 million impact. And then the last one there is the weight loss coverage um GLP1 coverage for weight loss which is a
significant cost and would be a significant reduction if you were to stop that coverage. And that estimates from Medicica directly at 3.6%. 6%. I don't know if you had something to add, Todd, or No. Well, I guess what
we'd add is we did um meet with the insurance committee and they weren't prepared to necessarily speak for their their uh bargaining units at that point. Um so we had them go back and get more input from their members. And then um we
put out a survey that that basically asked three questions. one was uh about how they want the increases to go, whether they're uniform across the board, and we'll talk about that next or or we're increasing the more expensive plans a little more than the less
expensive. And then we asked about the plan design changes and the GLP1 coverage um change. Uh and there was uh it it was there there was all of them were mixed. Um the plan design changes was pretty much overwhelmingly people
saying we would rather stick with the same plan design. We don't necessarily want to pass the costs on to people um you know in the firm form of higher out-of pocket costs. Uh the GLP1 coverage was more mixed. Um but the
BGLP1 coverage uh we there's a couple concerns we had about it is one is that with that statutory language about aggregate um value of benefits um in the past that when that has gone to court it
it has been situations where networks are narrowing and coverages are being reduced I I don't think there's as much a concern about increasing co- insurance or increasing out of pocket It's as re as taking a benefit people currently
have and and getting rid of it. And so we've we've always provided coverage for weight loss. Now, it's not for uh people who just want to look better. It's you have to meet a certain BMI and and for health reasons uh need to lose weight.
So, we've always covered that. It's just in the past the drugs weren't as expensive and weren't as effective. And now we have a really effective drug um that's expensive. And so more people are using it than have in the past. Um so uh
like I said the committee was mixed and even within bargaining units uh education Minnesota surveyed all of their people and they said it was kind of a third a third a third with people who said get rid of the GLP1s, keep the
GLP1s and we're not sure what to do. Um uh so uh you know when we get to our recommendation we we didn't end up recommending uh plan design changes uh because of that feedback we got from the committee.
Um and so I think I've covered the slide probably. I wasn't looking at it. I was just talking. Okay. So moving on to our rate recommendation. Uh first uh this slide shows our current rates um with the
current standard district contribution. So uh uh all of our dis our bargaining groups uh right now have negotiated the same contribution. We have a few who have a who have fixed flex contributions, but but you know, over
90% of our employees have an $810 district contribution negotiated and a 1515 family contribution negotiated uh for this year. And there you can see the current monthly premiums range from $810 to
$1,20 uh for single and from 21105 to 27.80 80 for family. Uh and there next to it you can see so the employee share is the difference between those two. So for singles it ranges from $0 to 210 a
month. Um and for families from 5.90 to 1265. uh the f the next column shows the per check amount employees are playing and and that's I think the what we uh really like to show the board because I think it gives you the
best idea of how this is impacting people on an every other week basis during those school year those 20 checks that we take uh contributions out of. Um, so there you can see it's 0 to $126 coming out of people's checks right now
if they're on single and for families it's between 354 and 756. Uh, and also next to that you can see what percent of insurance is paid by the district. So, the district's covering 80 to 100% of single insurance
depending on the plan people choose and between 54 and 72% of family insurance depending on the plan. So, that's to give you a a base of where we're at right now. Um, okay. Right. We have currently
groups that have contracts negotiated for this year agreed to a 5% increase to health insurance premiums uh to the health insurance premium contributions by the district. So those groups we're looking at a 850 single 1590 family
contribution and then when two employees are when are that are both insurance eligible are married they get a dual spouse contribution that's equal to the single and family together. So they're we're not charging any more than if one of them held family and the other
decided to hold single not as part of the family. It is is sort of the logic behind that. Um we have eight bargaining groups who are current currently have open contracts. So right now they're at that 8:15 810 and 1515. Um but for
demonstration purposes 5% is what's budgeted. And so if we assume that these groups settle at that 5% the the upcoming slide show the employee share with these um
contributions. Um, okay. So, these are the two options we're asking the board to consider. Um, one is in order to get that 15.3 million, it's a 22% increase on overall premiums. So, if we we
increase the overall premium on all plans by 22%, that would do it. Um we have a second option which is to increase the premium on the choice plans the two higher plans by 23% and then the
lower plans by 20%. Uh the the reason behind the second I'll just mention it is when we set our rates um there there's a decrement that Medicica suggests that we have between plans. So they say that the elect plan should be
about 93 to 94% as expensive as the um choice plan and the Vantage Plus should be about 91%. And right now they're about 97 and 94%. So we have the ability to decrease them another 3% and still re
remain within that decrement so that we don't risk having people move to that plan and lose more revenue from premiums you know than we we save um from savings from them going to a more affordable plan. Um so you know either
of these would be options. Um the the second option the goal would be to create keep a lower cost plan. um for people they can move on to one of those lowerc cost plans if they choose. So if you move to the next slide
um this looks again like like the one with the current rates u but what I note here so this shows those new monthly premiums if you were to increase um the total premiums by 22%. So doing that that monthly premium goes up to 9.90 to
1245 for single and 2570 to 33.90 for family. And then we see the district share and the employee share per month. Um so where that employee share previously um for single was 0 to
$210, we'd be looking at 140 to 395. Um and for family what was 590 to 1265 becomes 980 to 1,800 and then moving that to per check on this slide you can see the per check
amount and then the change in employee contributions. Um so you can see if you just look at the single um your choice co-pay uh the the employees were paying $126 now they're paying $237. So,
there's a $111 increase um on that plan. If you go down to the bottom to Vantage Plus, employees were paying zero and now they're paying $84. Um so, uh you know, there we've had
comments from employees that say, well, when you're they're concerned that they feel the percentages are misleading. Um, and we understand that because the percentages for employees are significantly higher. Uh, but if I put
percentages on this, it would really kind of be confusing because the when uh when your contribution goes from $25 to 87 to $102, that $87 district increase is going to be several hundred of an
increase. But really, the $246 the person on elect family is seeing, even though that's going to show up as a 40% increase or a 50% increase, it's going to hit them a lot harder on a bi-weekly basis. Um so because the
employees are all starting at different contribution amounts that that percent increase um on the employee uh I guess just isn't as valuable a number as the the dollar amount. This is where you can really see the impact it
will have um on employees again given you know current uh budgeted increases in in district contributions. Yeah, Director Simon. Thanks, Casey. Um, so I don't know if I
understood understood not giving the percentages. So, as I calculate it and I'll only use family, right? Because so we talk about a 22% increase. We understand that's on total premium, not on an individual case. We talked about that. But if I use the I use the monthly
employee share and tell me if this is invalid but looking at current to option one right just on family it's a 42 to a 66% increase for the employee correct that's correct right I mean that's no
that's correct that's valid right I mean that's so when employees look at that and they say wow my insurance has gone up 42 to 66% that's true in this option okay thanks I Yeah. I think what I'd say though is if with if you were looking at
first of all the Vantage plus 8020 that goes from 0 to $72, it's impossible to calculate the percent increase because they're going from a zero to a dollar amount for single. And if you were to go to elect 8020, you're going from a
$25 um to $102. So that's a 400% increase. And so that's why I'm saying the the 400% increase on the single for elect makes it seem like it's worse than the two
246 increase for families. So okay, so for for single for single Yeah, it it creates a because you're using different denominators, it it can be a little misleading. Um if we move to option two
uh so this is the second option where we increase the elect advantage plus by a slightly smaller percent um than the uh the choice plans. Uh and so here you can see this uh creates an increase of 72 to to
$117 for single and $24 to $339 per ch pay paycheck per family um in employee contributions. Okay. Yes. Quick question. Um, says change per check, I guess. How often do they get paid? What's the frequency? So,
insurance deductions come out of 20 paychecks. Uh, so we don't take them out over the summer. Um, teachers and paras generally get 21 to 22 paychecks per year. Um, and so it it comes out of 20 for most people. And
then if someone goes on a leave, we might extend it by a paycheck rather than recalculating. And then we have, you know, our year round employees do get 26 checks. Uh but because the vast majority of the employees are school year only, we we still take it out of 20
for all employees. All right. So moving on. Um our uh what we are recommend recommending um from district administration is option two. Um so there you're seeing the uh um the
amounts for option two. Um and if you go to the next slide it gives uh some justification. Um, so the biggest thing is that increasing the Vantage Plus and Lux plans less than the choice plans provides a lower priced option while
while also bringing our plans closer to their suggested cost decrement. Um, so we don't want to be in a situation where we're getting huge migration to a plan that's artificially underpriced, but the plans would still be appropriately priced compared to each other.
Um, and then the second thing is that introducing plan design changes that may result in a reduction in the aggregate value of benefits isn't recommended without the consensus of all bargaining groups. Um, and we didn't have the consensus of all bargaining groups um at
that table. And and with these increases, we might get that in the future. So, I think we're going to have ongoing discussions about um possibly making changes to plans in the future and and and trying to get everyone on
the same page. Uh but right now, we just don't feel confident that uh we have that and and we could avoid a grievance um if we were to make a unilateral change. Uh co-chair Argo. And so I know this is
a first read, but um when does a decision have to be made by? Like what's the constraint there? So the the constraint there um May 12th is next Monday. Um and we need to have our open enrollment
materials to print on May 13th um in order to get them in time for open enrollment to start. We also have an online enrollment um system um and we have to have all the rates programmed into that. So they have to be programmed
in by the vendor the week of uh May 12th so that we have a week to test the system before uh going live the week after um labor after Memorial Day. Uh so yeah, if we don't have a board decision
today, uh we would ask that the board uh meet again in some fashion and I I believe Superintendent McIntyre has spoken to you about the possibility. Um yeah, we discussed having a special
session specifically to allow for this first read because of the wet severe weather cancellation of our prior meeting. um having this public discussion about the rates as a first read and then coming back in a week um on that Monday to take a vote so that
the public has time to continue processing and reacting and providing us feedback. Yeah. I think one thing that needs to be made very clear is that the decision on setting rates is really just about
ensuring that we get the 15.3 million more we need in order to keep the funds solvent. Um the the question of what the district's contributing is a completely different question. So, um, when people
look at the change to my paycheck, um, there could be separate things the board can do to to remedy that, but ultimately the rates are what they are. Director Simon, thanks, Casey. Um, so in
our discussions and in my research for this, I just want to give uh I received questions from our staff, so I just want to give this information. Correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think I am because Todd, I talked to you about it, but um
so a a 22% overall increase like and I'm not suggesting the district's going to take all that on, but if they did, it's a you had mentioned to me it's about every 1% is a half a million dollar cost would be a cost to the district. So 22%
is an additional $11 million that the district would to keep things even now. Um so just to talk about the type of money we're looking at. Um I received a lot of questions about the public employee insurance program
which is the statewide health plan for districts and um what I and so we receive quotes from them also have in the past and our self-employed has always been a lower cost than the public employee health program and and people
ask me well how can that be because you're in a pool with the entire state and it should you know your pool shouldn't matter as much but that my understanding is that's been changed that the employee a public employee health insurance now sets rates for each district right so they would look at our
pool as opposed to everyone in the state and unfortun I mean fortunately or unfortunately our pool right now we talked about the large um you know the the large dollar amounts that have increased um with our experience so I just wanted people to know that we do
look at that um the rates have been higher than we have had in other quotes. Um, and you know, maybe I know there's a push for the state to reconsider how they look at that type of a program from organizations. So maybe that'll be
something in the future. Um, the only other thing I wanted to mention because, you know, we received a lot of feedback and I already said this about the 22%. Um, it's it's it can be misleading if you don't understand that, but to get
down to a dollar amount, option two for singles, folks on those plans would see a using 20 paychecks would see a 1440 to a 2340 increase in a year. The family
would receive a 4,080 to 6780 increase in the year based on 20 paychecks with those increases. So that's the increase that you will find. Um, see if I missed anything else. Yeah, I think I think that's all I
wanted to uh the questions I got. I just wanted to make sure that our employees and the public understood those answers to that. Thank you board members. Any further questions or discussion on this?
Director Aette on the on the GLP1 medication when when did was that something new that started to I I don't know anything about it. So yeah, just talk about how that like to
me it the impact of that is so huge. you know it I hate to suggest but it feels like well I didn't anticipate that right or you know is it do you want to explain
that Sure so GLP ones I mean the the present the ones that we're talking about now the Ozmpic is really the first one that came out right so and that was to treat it was approved FDA approved to treat diabetes so that's how it kind of came into the realm and and it worked and people started losing weight so then
they formulated different versions so then you the BGOI and the Mangaro and the Zeppbound different versions that are targeting weight loss, not just diabetes. Um, and that's that's how it kind of it went from it was only being
approved if you were diagnosed diabetic to then it was approved by the FB FDA. These same some semlutide to the same drug but different brand names, a little bit of different formulations. Um, got FDA approval for weight loss. Um, and then all kinds of other things. So
that's when it's really started to explode. So are you do this for other schools or for other companies or what's the scope of where you where you practice? Uh yes, across the board. I I personally work with St. Paul public schools too, but then other publicities
too. How other organizations have been impacted by it? So the groups that are in this state um fully insured. So the St. Paul public schools happens to be fully insured. the health plans in the state are not covering GLP1s for weight loss. The on a fully the insurance
companies aren't covering it. Um nationally depending on the survey you look at AON survey it's it's around 5050 now on companies that are covering GLP1s for weight loss. Um, and that can vary. Larger the company, the higher that percentage is a little bit, but So,
we're proposing to drop that coverage or we're not we're going to leave that. We um we did get a consideration for ways to to cut costs, cost considerations, and that was something that we brought forward as a
consideration to the committee. Um, we did seek input from our employee groups, and that's where we got the really mixed review. Um, in addition to what Josh had just shared, uh, we also learned that most, um, public employers are covering
GLP1s for weight loss, including PEEP, um, and, uh, including, uh, the majority of other, uh, school districts. If if we dropped it, um, you know, hypothetically, if we did it, Wow, I'm
picking up. Sorry. Um, just cuz I'm too far away. must be uh if hypothetically if we dropped it then does that change the the modeling for that the way that curve would go? I mean can that alone uh I know there's some cost savings but the
project the predicted claims does that bring that back down in line? It brings it down 3.6%. So you'd still be looking at an 18.5% increase on average. Yeah, there are more more and more studies emerging now about the longer
term potential impacts though and the potential benefits of of these drugs just the the the benefits of weight loss. It's still kind of new in the game so we don't know what that longer term be that if you lower weight you have other reduced costs right
okay thank you the other thing I think that I hadn't mentioned is there is a bill before the legislature to require it um so there would be a concern if we set rates if we we cut it and then set rates for that
savings and ended up with a bill passed that required us to cover it and then we'd have that cost even though we've set the rates. Not to anticipate that. I don't I don't know the
likelihood that bill will pass. Director Simon. So on and Todd, you also mentioned like taking away something you offered could be it sounds like challengeable in court and you might not be able to do that for
this specifically for the GLP ones. Um can you can you legally say okay here are our plans. They don't they don't generally include GLP1. Let's just use that as an example. Maybe it maybe some of these other large things
you could do this too like carveouts if you will but if you can do an add-on and you can have GLP ones and it's X amount. Now I know that doesn't in the insurance game it probably doesn't work because you aggregate it over your whole pool and if only 10 people want to do it the
cost is going to be so high they won't want to do it. I'm just curious if there's a way, you know, we have we probably have a lot of folks who want need that medication, but we have a lot of folks who don't. So, is are there can you do that or not? Or does that just
not work? Is it my my limited knowledge in the insurance game might be showing him? Can you describe again what you mean do how exactly what Okay, let's use GLP1 as an example. So, we have all of these plans that you're recommending, right? Um, and none of them include GLP
ones. So, whatever the increase would be minus 3.6%. Let's just for argument sake. But we also have an add-on that employee can say, I want GLP1's covered and they can take that and there would be a cost to that.
You could probably have one plan that covered it and others that didn't. I don't know exactly in the statute how that works with the aggregate value though whether it has to be the most prevalent plan or the lowest cost plan but yeah the easier way to do it is one plan that
covers it we could set rates for it and it can be done as far as that statute around the aggregate value I'm not I'm not positive how that would work but yeah it's just like giving the employees who who need it and want it the option
to get it but not having but again it goes for the whole pool, right? So, if you only have x amount of people taking that one with GLP1, the rates are probably going to be so high. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Average cost is about $1,200 a month for the drugs. So, Wow. Okay. And it's a maintenance med that you keep
taking. Yeah. Forever. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Members, any further discussion before we let our guests go? All right. Uh, thank you for being here so late with us. We really
appreciate it. Take care. All right, board. Our next agenda item is finance item 11A, preliminary FY26 and FY27 general fund budget. We welcome Michelle Vargas, our chief financial officer.
Good evening, Chair Desaine, Superintendent McIntyre, members of the board. Um, tonight, what I have for you is an update of a presentation we did back on February 24th, looking at our projected budget for 26 and 27 for the
next bianium. Um, generally we always do this during a funding year for the legislature. So, we're keeping track of what's going on, what has changed. Um, and where we're at as we're looking at budget cuts again to kind of highlight
what we predict that target to be based on the two years. Um, from where we're at, um, just to remind you, our budget timeline for the 25 26 year, uh, we certified our levy back in December. We
the legislative session is supposed to end on May 19th. It's not looking highly likely that it will, but maybe it will. Um the forecast has changed slightly. We had a six over $600 million surplus for
the upcoming bianium and um $5.1 billion deficit. It's now a $6 billion deficit for 2829 since February. Um in January, February, we finalized enrollments. We've been doing staffing since then and will continue to do staffing. Department
of site budgets have went out. Um we were are doing preliminary review of the assumptions. I will be back in two weeks with all funds for um for the final 26 and then um looking for board approval for the 26 budget on June 23rd.
But tonight we're looking at both the 26 and 27 and that is just the bianial what's going on. There hasn't been a whole lot with the legislature to make changes to this presentation. We'll talk a little bit about some of the things that are out there but for the most part
the biggest change that's happened since um February was increase of the CPI. The CPI went from uh 2.33% up to 2.74. that increased it from $169 per pupil to $200 per pupil. So
that was over $1.2 million increase. So when we were looking at 6 million increase in revenue, we're at 8.9. Um based on our amended fiscal year 25, we updated our special ed revenue. So that's kind of rolled out. So there's an
increase in our special ed revenue also for fiscal year 26. Then the re previously 5.3 million. We're now up to 6.9 million. Um the other items on here really haven't changed much other than just how we're accounting for that
English language learner um the the amount of the adjustment each year in order to get that cross subsidy out there in fiscal year 27. Other than that, we're assuming still stable. We're holding stable for our investment so
far. Interest rates haven't plummeted at this point, so we're still holding that amount. Um but so those are kind of the changes that were looked at and assumptions for fiscal year 26 expenditures. Our expenditures um what's changed since then is you approved a transportation contract. We
knew there was a potential for for more that came out of that. We were in the the 20% range that we were budgeting for. It was closer to a 30% range. So that is included in this amount. So, where we are looking at a $14.1 million increase in expenditures, we're now up
to 18.6. Um, where we were at a much smaller um we're 7.5 million for chartered transportation and utilities, we're now at 10.3. Um, other than that, the other changes that we still have the the budget
reductions on here and then the $5.1 million fund balance transfer from strategic investments. We're also um making that change in order to preserve fund balance. That was part of the phase 2 budget cuts. In fiscal year 27, we have a $17
million. I will say that you're if you're looking at yours, I had to do a change on the expenditures. I didn't have it adjusted correctly for the $5 million reduction for the strategic investment of four year the fourth year. So on the it's updated here, but we need
to update the slides that are within the presentation that you're looking at. Revenue is a $17 million increase. Um that is the the CPI has not changed. We there hasn't been an adjustment on that. Um, so you're looking at the majority of
the 7.2 million is for CPI. Um, the other this growth factor for special education is 6.2 million. And then the English language learner, that's when that kicks in. Um, in fiscal year 27, we do have a decrease in that cross
subsidy transfer. That's in the in and the out on both sides of it. Expenditures are an increase of 11.6 million. um the assumption that we use for both years are 2 and a half on salaries and 5% on um benefits insurance which totals
16.2 million. We are reducing the strategic investment so that increases overall salaries because that's all staffing the 5.2 million. Um the other amount is just the larger increase for 2.4 4 million on services and utilities
um just because our um in the second year of that contract for transportation rather than being a 3% increase is a 5% increase. So that put that up a little bit higher. Director Simon, so could you go back one slide, please?
So Michelle, um on the assumptions or the budgeted salary benefit increase, right? So 2.5. So we have at least some folks at least our teachers and maybe others that are on like a step in lane if you will,
right? So there's a there's a built-in increase from year to year following those steps and lanes potentially unless you're on the top career that could be stagnant. But so 2.5% increase. I've had some people tell me, well,
so and just using that as an example, we get the step in the lane and you're going to add 2.5% to each step in lane. And I said, no, that's not true. 2.5 pretty much is just not increasing anything and letting the steps and lanes happen. Tell me if I'm wrong, or maybe
you can explain that better than I can. For the teachers teachers contract, which is that has steps and lanes, the other contracts generally don't have that. um their their steps and lanes. Um Todd does that calculation. It's over
2%. I don't it's not a full two and a half percent. It's over 2%. So to allow for steps and lanes, you're already at 2%. Gotcha. Okay, then that's what I remembered. So it's just it's just Yeah, just slightly over 2%. Then if Yeah, if
you're to increase across all of the cells, then that would be another go up from 2%. it'd be above 2.5% for sure. Okay, thank you. Okay, so then we have the updated 2-year
um looking at it based on these parameters that we're looking at. Um as you can see what we have for our adjusted deficit for the current year is 66.7 million. That is exactly what we've been looking at and bringing our fund
balance down to 8.3%. Then fiscal year 27. So with all those changes in the revenue and that what we were at on fis on um February 24th was a projected deficit of 16 million. We've increased it slightly by
those increases in the transportation and that up to 16 million475. So we had some increases in revenue that offset that larger increase but it didn't offset all of it. So at this point in time with the assumptions that we're making with the current CPI, there's
still a chance that CPI could be higher for for fiscal year 27. It's projected at 2.61. It doesn't leave a lot to get to that maximum of three. So there could be some there. What's out there in the legislature right now? The targets are zero pretty much or
$40 million all going to the read Act. Um both bills that have or haven't been approved. um have about there's some adding but then there's subtractions in areas that are still looking at a loss of revenue next year of around $600,000.
Superintendent. Yeah, that's what I was going to add. We're we're watching the omnibus bills. The House summary proposal right now is a net loss of about 560,000. The Senate is similar. It's just shy of 600,000 net loss. So,
and then as of today, right, it's so nothing's been decided at this point. The the biggest thing is that the Senate is looking out to balance and and reduce or put a pause on inflation in
fiscal year 208 and 29. So, that's I mean, annually that's a loss of revenue for us of about $9 million. if it's not, you're always hoping for it and it was written in. Um the house doesn't have that. There are some and then there's discussions around our compet because we
know that the new formula with the direct certifications and not counting the paper, how that worked out for us um is a loss of $3.8 million. At this point in time, we have a reserve. We'll be able to fund what we have next year
whether we get that 3.8 million or not because there's a reserve there. Um so we're we're not making any reductions in that area and waiting for them to make a decision. The Senate was looking at a hold harmless with having um a group brought together again to look at comped
which seems to happen quite a bit like almost every other year there's always some sort of task force um and the house was um not doing anything but also looking at a task force for fiscal year 27. So that's kind of what's going on out there. So, to the best of our
knowledge, what we're looking at right now is about a $16.5 million target for our budget reductions based on contracts being settled within the 2 and 12% and insurance contribution increases of 5%.
Now, all of that can change based on decisions that you make as a board of which way that you know those go. But based on these assumptions with 2 and a.5% on salaries and 5% on your insuranceances, we're looking at about a $16.5 million target for reductions in
fiscal year 27. The next slide are things we just talked about basic formulas 1% additional 1% which doesn't look like it's going to matter at this point but it's about $3 million every 1% you increase total
salaries is about 4.2 2 million 1% on health benefits. I know we were saying about 550,000. I've rounded up to 600,000 just even. Um what's included in here? Unfunded mandates. So the the family the Minnesota paid family leave
act that's in here and that's part of what's causing um the increase in expenditures. It's not funded. Um in order to do that, what's also in there is the unemployment. So, if there's a change made on the unemployment right now, some of it that is out there is
to finish through summer of 28. We run out of money next summer is what they're saying that we potentially with different ones. Um, so that's kind of in play, too. The 2.1 million that we're seeing each year that is unfunded
after this summer. So those are the things that are still out in play, but as of right now, we have it expensed in our budget to cover it. We did not have revenue for it. So th this is what is part of our deficit. If something gets
better, it reduces our deficit. So we have we're we're accounting for everything to what could hit us or will hit us as of right now. Um, this was the governor's the next
slide, please. I had one more, but maybe not. The there was a we had the governor's when the governor had um what he proposed was compensatory current loss of 3.8 million, which is what one of them is.
Um there was also some reductions um in areas for transportation and also potentially our comped pilot in fiscal year 27 which is 4.7 million. So those things we haven't seen in any of the bills as of this point but those were
what the governor was looking at. Um and potentially the loss of QC count that was a big one $10 million. The again those have not been out there in the bills. Superintendent McIntyre. Thank you, Chair Deshaine. Um the compad pilot
was was in there and we spent lots of time there's seven districts involved in that pilot. We're at 85% of it. We we did a very aggressive um set of communications around that and that seems to have we're not seeing it in
there. Doesn't mean it can't find its way back in there, but that's another nearly$5 million that would only add to that deficit. Um, the other thing I would just mention too is that the Q the Q comp piece here, that's that's about
$7 million of end of year stipens for for teachers and then another 30% of that's just paying for the staff to run and do the coaching around the um the the program. There's also been I don't think it's going to get maybe addressed this session, but the state's going to
have to deal with pensions and it's a real problem in in the next nine years. If nothing happens, the state simply can't afford it. So, they're going to if you remember the rule of 85, rule 90, those things don't exist. Without it, um across the state, everyone's going to end at the end of our pay scale costing
all districts more more and more and more. So for us, I think if nothing happens, that's an additional $120 million over nine years that we we don't have. So I sense urgency around it. We've heard a lot about it at AMSD. I don't think they're going to do much
about it this this year, but it is clearly on the radar. Um, and it may be a policy. We'll have to see. We'll have to see, but it it's it's coming and we all need it to be addressed. And at some point, we'll do a work session on that so you can get your arms around it a bit more. So just
have that in the background. Uh that's a statewide issue along with insurance. Those two things are really big challenges for the state as a whole, not just our own district. Um I have heard some ideas around
um different ways to fund that, but nothing with real traction yet. I don't know if you want to add anything, Dr. Langenfeld, but no, I I think that funding overall just the Q comp for us. That's our
number, but there's there's a a fairly good size and I've heard it being considered to offset something else is really what they're it's um to offset a place where it would impact all all districts in a positive
way. Not all districts have it. Oh yeah, he would that was the that's I've heard that more than once that they would use it in a way that all districts would benefit from returning that money for something else. There's a lot of negotiating left to be done. You are.
But if all these things on the list happened, that really moves our target of 16 almost 17 million even deeper. Yeah. Significantly deeper. Most of the stuff out there just it it's adding here but taking away here. So, it's not
there's not a real net gain, but just moving it around. Yeah. The only other thing I'll comment on is um there is some language in a few bills to allow one-time fund transfer. We we have healthy fund balances in our child nutrition area. Um it's it's not a
long-term solution. It can give some temporary relief somewhere. I don't even know if it'll have enough traction to get passed, but the those fund transfers are in the conversation. Director Simon. Thanks, Casey. Um, so on
the QC comp discussion, I I think this is my understanding of it, right? So, I know we said all these things would add to, but we have if if it's 30%, we probably have 30 coaches, let's say around that range. So really what would happen if we lose that funding the
teachers wouldn't if they meet their Q comp they wouldn't get that extra money right that the state allocates as part of this and those 30 staff members would I think most or all our teachers. So they would move they would have rights
to move back to a classroom and probably bump well they'd bump someone right probably a um a a new teacher like that doesn't have tenure yet. So, so it does add it would add to but there's a there's a logical path of what we have
to do to to do that. So, I just wanted to mention that. And then could you go back two slides real quick? I just have a it might be because it's late. One more. No, no, no. I'm sorry. That was it. Um, it might just be because it's late, but for fiscal year 27 with the
fund balance being down to 5.2, I think we agreed the board has agreed on the 8.3 whatever that number is because we kept in some things that were on the table but we I don't think we've ever has this board agreed that we want to go to down to 5.2 This this shows so no
what this shows is you would make that budget reduction of 16.5 million to maintain the 8.3%. And this board may say we have to go deeper than that to build back the fund balance which I at least I would in order to okay so yeah I would say that you're short in the
operating deficit of 16.5 million. So that's your minimum target unless to get back to 8%. what your math mind real quick at if you were to do it all in one year you would need to do another
another like 10 million 11 million okay thanks I mean it's in order to do this then you'd be looking at 26 27 million understood it might be a multi-year thing but just to give folks an understanding to get that fund balance somewhat near 10% which is what this
board hopes for I think Okay, thanks. Okay, that's all I have for tonight. If there's any other questions, thank you for being here with us so late. Appreciate the presentation. All right, board members, we are nearing
our last board agenda item. Um, but we do have an executive session after that, so be prepared. Um, board correspondence and communication. It's our opportunity to share happenings in our community, report on committee assignments or any other items of interest. Um, I'll go
first quickly and then others can share. I wanted to share with everybody that the district held a community conversations meeting with PTO leaders from around the entire district uh at the end of April and it was a really positive discussion and the commitment
from our parent groups and leaders to support their school communities and the students in them is astounding. So, it was a really thoughtful discussion and I think people really appreciated the opportunity to come in, weigh in, talk about our budget situations, talk about
their school um success stories and things they've done to support students. Um, tons of activities going on in our schools. Um, we've had middle school plays, Jackson to Dallas Wonderland, a great production. Um, Champlain Park
High School's doing Hades Town. There's another weekend of shows there if anybody wants to go. It was exceptional. The orchestras have done lullaby concerts. The bands are doing their final performances, choir showcases. There's something to do every single night of the week if you if you so desire to do that. Um, I just
specifically want to call out uh I was able to visit Dayton Elementary's Adventures Plus program with Representative Danny Nao. Um, and it was a really good learning opportunity for us. We walked through, talked to the A+ leaders. Um and uh Director Langenfeld
was able to join us and just hear how that program is supporting parents and families in our communities with before and after school care. Thank you. Anyone else have something to share? Uh Director Langfeld, I've been um leaning into the the
conversations that we continue to have at the board table and concerns raised. So I actually met um to talk with math with uh Jessica Tucker in the math talls to talk about with her and a math specialist. I think it was the person
who came before the board to just get a better understanding of college preparatory math and what was next steps. I also as you talked about um visited A+ and and um and the we went to the ECF program at Riverview. In
addition to that, uh, co-chair Duchaine and I actually came and observed a social studies class right here at Samberg. Um, I participated in I actually went over set up a meeting over at Chapel Park to visit physics class so that I could understand what that looks
like and what the concerns might be as well. And then of course did all the various district um things. um great opportunity to watch in action the clawbot competition which was uh project lead the way computer integrated
manufacturing uh program that's coming out of sims and the rapids engineering program where we have students very engaged and I know we just got invited to their senior capstones and I would I would support them uh if you can attend I
attended a student showcase and reading night at Adams Elementary volunteered a couple days at Monroe for their MCA testing that's been going on and then um I attended Hello Dolly over at Rapids uh or yeah Rapids High
School which was exceptional as well. But as I look at this I think one of the biggest um opportunities I've been afforded is I served on the Minnesota as the Minnesota school board representative for the Minnesota Teacher of the Year panel this year. And when
you sit and listen to the stories of the 12 finalists and knowing they represent our teachers, it was so inspirational. The person that was selected 49 years in the classroom and
this is a woman who has taken um English language uh arts to a new level in terms of making it relevant and important for the students in her classroom. And there are reasons that many of her students
actually have come back and our teachers um because she has inspired them. She's she's incredible. Um every everyone we had to meet there was a very high level of energy around the insurance that we recognize the importance of public
education and how how critical of a time it is for public education to ensure that we serve all. So I I was very inspired. There were times that you really felt um uh not only inspired but
recognize the the level of capacity that our teachers are engaging in as well. So if you read about Wall-E as she calls herself, um she's that and much more. Um so very proud of her on our team now. So
anyone else have something they want to share? Uh, Coach Erogo. Uh, just two quick mentions. I got to go to the POW at Champ Park High School. Thought it was pretty neat. It was pretty cool thing to witness and lots of vendors to see afterwards. So, it's just good
interacting with the community. Um, and then I got the opportunity to see all the elementary school art displays at Northtown Mall. Well done to all the elementary students. You're a far better artist than I am. Excellent. All right. Uh the next agenda
item is an executive session. So this session will take place in the Michael Sullivan room and will be closed pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D.03 subdivision 1 to deal with matters of labor negotiations for all open groups. The closed uh session, yeah, we already said we'll be in the
Michael Sullivan room. Uh I would entertain a motion to move to a closed session for the reasons stated. So moved. Thank you, Director Simon. Do we have a second? Thank you, Director Arco with um motion or Adette. Gosh, sorry. Thank you. Uh any discussion?
Okay, hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Any oppose say nay. With six in favor and zero opposed, we will move into closed session. Five minute break. Thank you. Five. over.