The potential co-op agreement with Sacred Heart emerged as a important topic due to the dwindling numbers in the East Grand Forks girls’ hockey program, particularly at the junior varsity and 15U levels. The board was informed that Sacred Heart sought a decision for the upcoming school year, necessitating discussions about the terms and implications of such an agreement. Concerns were raised regarding whether students might transfer to Sacred Heart to take advantage of the hockey opportunities, as well as the potential effects on student enrollment numbers. While no immediate decisions were made, the conversation was deemed essential for future planning.

The dialogue on the co-op agreement revealed multiple perspectives. Some participants expressed concern that the lack of players at the 10U and 8U levels would not support a sustainable program, with one individual expressing a fear of reaching a point where the program might have to rely on a co-op to survive. There was acknowledgment that while girls’ hockey numbers were not currently dire, challenges at the junior high level, such as the absence of a 15U team, could impact player development. The discussion touched on the complexities of including students from outside the East Grand Forks district, emphasizing the need for guidelines that respect existing enrollment policies while exploring the benefits of a cooperative program.

Some board members and participants noted the prevalence of co-op arrangements in girls’ hockey across the region, with other towns already partnering with different schools to maintain their programs. Skepticism remained about whether a co-op would solve the underlying issues, with some arguing it might be a short-term solution that fails to address the need for a robust youth program. The example of the Youth Basketball Association was cited as a successful grassroots model that strengthened high school teams.

Financial considerations also played a role in the co-op debate. Concerns were voiced about the potential costs, with participants wary of opening a “can of worms” that could lead to financial setbacks. While co-oping could generate revenue through fees, it would not result in state funding since the students would not be enrolled in the East Grand Forks school system. Despite these challenges, there was positive feedback from parents and coaches about the co-op’s potential to alleviate program struggles, with one individual noting widespread parental support for the initiative.

In addition to the co-op discussion, the board addressed the implementation of the AVID program. The conversation underscored the need for a “year zero plan” to build internal capacity and expertise. A participant shared positive experiences from attending AVID training in San Diego, emphasizing the program’s potential to enhance student outcomes, particularly for those striving to improve their academic performance. However, scheduling conflicts with other electives posed challenges to student participation.

The board also received updates on financial matters, including a state cyber grant of $60,000, with funds allocated for cyber insurance and safety upgrades within the district. The possibility of refinancing bonds was discussed, which could yield annual savings of approximately $20,000. Concerns about ongoing busing issues were raised, with routes experiencing delays and a call for employees willing to be trained as drivers.

Further discussions focused on instructional strategies and coaching within the district, noting a growing interest among teachers for support in improving their practices. The board acknowledged the challenges associated with implementing new initiatives like AVID and emphasized the importance of patience in seeing results. A resolution regarding the issuance of refunding bonds was presented, granting the administration authority to proceed with necessary paperwork, while the actual sale would depend on market conditions.