The superintendent presented a analysis of the district’s financial situation, highlighting that the general fund increase from the state of Minnesota has not kept pace with inflation, resulting in a structural deficit nearing $20 million. This deficit is exacerbated by Rochester’s position as the lowest-ranked district among its peers in terms of voter-approved operating levies. The superintendent stressed that even if the referendum were successful, it would only marginally improve the district’s financial standing.

To address the anticipated shortfall, a conservative estimate of $16.7 million in budget cuts was proposed. These cuts would involve several measures, such as increasing class sizes by three students and potentially closing some schools. The superintendent explained that these actions, although challenging, are necessary to maintain financial stability.

The Board explored various areas for potential reductions, including the elimination of positions deemed non-instructional and cuts to programs that provide additional support to students. Four key investment areas were identified for potential reductions: roles supporting students needing extra assistance, programs for advanced learners, mental health services, and career and technical education programs. The necessity of maintaining core educational services while navigating these cuts was emphasized, along with the importance of maintaining transparency with the community.

During the meeting, there were concerns about the impact of these cuts on the learning environment. Increasing class sizes was particularly contentious, with Board members expressing that this could exacerbate existing issues within the district. The potential closure of elementary schools was another focal point, with an estimated excess capacity of about 1,100 students. The logistical challenges of redrawing attendance boundaries and the impact on transportation were discussed in depth.

A participant highlighted the psychological discomfort caused by the uncertainty surrounding these decisions, noting that previous experiences had left many feeling “blindsided.” This sentiment was echoed in discussions about the need for thorough community engagement and transparent communication. The superintendent agreed to provide a timeline for when the community would be informed about potential school closures, particularly if the referendum did not pass.

In addition to the financial discussions, the Board also addressed the implications of data requests made by external entities. A resolution was proposed to address the increasing burden of these requests on school districts, particularly those made anonymously. The Board discussed the need for legislative reform to modernize the language around data requests and the financial strain caused by fulfilling these requests, especially when they are for commercial purposes.

A resolution for the Minnesota School Board Association (MSBA) delegate assembly was introduced. The resolution, which would be presented in collaboration with the Farmington and Hastings school districts, proposes amendments to the Minnesota Data Practices Act to prohibit anonymous data requests and allow districts to charge fees for requests with commercial implications.

As the meeting drew to a close, the Board reflected on the challenges ahead, emphasizing the need for thoughtful analysis and clear communication with the community. The importance of providing concrete examples to illustrate the potential impact of budget cuts was stressed, with suggestions to use familiar names and positions in discussions about potential reductions. The Board expressed a commitment to engaging with stakeholders and refining their recommendations to ensure the district’s financial stability and continued support for student learning. The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.