The potential closure of schools emerged as a prominent topic of debate, driven by the declining enrollments at three schools, specifically Harrison, Garfield, and L, each with student populations ranging from 225 to 240. The board acknowledged a previous commitment made in 2018 to maintain neighborhood schools, questioning whether that promise remains feasible given the current enrollment figures. Concerns about classroom capacities, the utilization of space, and the need to maintain equitable class sizes complicated the decision-making process. The board also examined how potential closures could affect student achievement, with a call for recommendations from the administrative team that would prioritize preserving educational quality.

The fiscal implications of closing schools were also scrutinized, with a focus on administrative costs and staffing. Some members expressed disappointment that no administrative cuts were proposed alongside those affecting teachers and students, highlighting a public perception of untouchable administrative roles. Additionally, the board considered using financial reserves to balance the budget amidst proposed cuts, while acknowledging the unsustainability of relying heavily on these funds.

In parallel, the board discussed Minnesota’s new paid family leave law, set to take effect on January 1st, which mandates that staff earning over $3,900 annually are entitled to up to 20 weeks of paid leave for personal or family medical conditions. The district plans to implement an equivalent plan through its long-term disability benefits provider to expedite claims. Efforts are underway to notify employees about the new law by December 1st.

The meeting also addressed a draft social media policy intended to formalize guidelines for employee behavior online. The policy aims to prevent blurred professional boundaries, particularly concerning staff interactions with students on social media. Suggestions were made to clarify the language. Concerns were raised about the policy’s alignment with existing school regulations, prompting a call for legal review before final approval.

Budgetary challenges were another focal point, with discussions on a community survey designed to gauge public opinion on district priorities. The survey seeks to gather informal input on funding preferences and areas of importance, particularly from parents. Additionally, a rubric was introduced to align potential reductions with the strategic plan goals, focusing on middle school activities and the feasibility of transitioning to community education. The conversation revealed differing opinions on whether the board or leadership team should utilize the rubric for scoring.

The superintendent search process also garnered attention, as the board established a timeline for the search. Discussions covered the importance of community engagement, with plans to conduct surveys and focus groups to gather input on desired superintendent qualities. The board deliberated over the salary range for the position, ultimately setting it between $190,000 and $220,000, balancing candidate attractiveness with budgetary constraints.