St. Louis Park Schools approves tight budget amid community pushback
The St. Louis Park school board unanimously approved its fiscal year 2026 budget assumptions on March 26, but the vote came after heated public comment about proposed schedule changes and deep board concerns about future funding cuts. The district faces a $2 million budget reduction and is bracing for additional state and federal funding losses that could further strain its already lean finances.
The board's budget votes passed 7-0, but one director seconded reluctantly, reflecting underlying anxiety about the district's financial trajectory. The district's fund balance sits at $5.6 million (8.2% of the budget), which is below the recommended 12-16% and lower than peer districts in the metro area, according to Director Magnuson's presentation.
The meeting was dominated by community opposition to proposed school changes tied to the budget cuts. Teachers and parents packed the public comment period to voice concerns about a new 5.5-out-of-7 teaching load for secondary teachers and cuts to elementary specialist classes like PE, library, and STEM/arts instruction. Teacher Kesha Peele said the proposed schedule "is rarely used in high schools across the metro area" and called it "an unreasonable expectation." Parents expressed feeling blindsided by the lack of advance notice and input opportunities.
Superintendent Hines defended the changes as data-driven efforts to improve academic achievement and move toward a unified "school system." She acknowledged concerns about PE cuts but said the district would incorporate more movement throughout the school day.
Board members expressed alarm about the district's financial outlook. The FY2026 budget assumes no loss of federal or state funding, but anticipated cuts—such as a proposed 5% reduction in special education transportation reimbursement—could deplete the fund balance further. Board members urged community members to advocate with state legislators for better school funding.
In other action, the board unanimously approved Policy 515, which strengthens student data privacy protections. The board also heard updates on the district's performance against state academic goals, finding it fell short on early reading proficiency and closing achievement gaps between Black and White students. A new Summer Learning Design Team presented plans for an inclusive, academically rigorous summer program focused on accessibility for marginalized communities.
Our proprietary artificial intelligence agent analyzed publicly available documents including meeting agendas, minutes, and transcripts to write this story to help inform local residents. Feedback helps us improve, so please consider rating how we did with the thumbs up or down below.
Go deeper on this topic
Research related meeting documents and build a brief — without rewriting the story.
Full analysis
Votes (8)
Public Comment on Proposed School Changes and Budget Reductions
Dissent: Numerous community members voiced strong opposition and concern.
Community members, including parents and teachers, expressed significant apprehension and frustration over newly proposed school schedule changes. Teachers cited concerns about overwhelming workloads (5.5/7 teaching load), teacher burnout, and the potential negative impact on student support and relationships. Parents voiced distress over cuts to elementary specialist classes (PE, library, STEM/arts), questioning the impact on student well-being and academic outcomes, and expressing a feeling of being 'blindsided' by the lack of prior communication or input opportunities. The discussion highlighted a perceived disconnect between the administration's goals (academic rigor, budget reduction) and the community's experience.
Superintendent Report
Superintendent Hines addressed the public comments by explaining the rationale behind the K-12 school changes. She stated the changes aim to improve academic achievement and address a $2 million budget reduction. She confirmed increased core instruction time at elementary schools (110 mins/week) and block scheduling for middle/high schools. Hines reassured the board and public that decisions are data-driven, align with the district's mission, and that concerns about PE reductions are being mitigated by incorporating more movement throughout the school day and in flexible learning spaces. She highlighted the shift from operating as 'a system of schools' to a more unified 'school system'.
Discussion Item 6A: Midyear 2025 and Budget Assumptions Fiscal Year 2026
Director Magnuson presented the fiscal overview. The FY2025 midyear budget projected a stable 8.2% fund balance ($5.6 million), slightly up due to enrollment and special education revenue increases, balanced against higher staffing costs. For FY2026, the district aims to maintain the 8% fund balance but acknowledged no plan to grow it to the recommended 12-16%, noting the district is an 'outlier' in the metro area with a low fund balance. Crucially, the budget assumes no loss of federal or state funding, meaning anticipated cuts (e.g., 5% cut in special education transportation reimbursement proposed by the governor) would deplete the fund balance further. Board members expressed deep concern about the 'difficult landscape' for public education funding, the inability to levy more taxes, and the inevitability of future cuts impacting staff and students, urging community advocacy.
Discussion Item 6B: World's Best Workforce and Assa presentation
Dr. Becca Star presented the district's performance on state-mandated World's Best Workforce goals for the 2023-2024 school year. The district did not meet targets for early reading proficiency, closing achievement gaps (Black-White students in reading/math), increasing ACT composite scores, or improving graduation rates. While some individual grade levels showed significant gains (e.g., Aquilla and Peter Hobart 5th grade math/reading proficiency), these were not reflected in the aggregate data. Board discussion highlighted the limitations of these single metrics in capturing nuanced student growth and the importance of disaggregated data and continuous improvement plans. There was also advocacy for shifting from MCA to ACT testing for better data utility and student engagement.
Discussion Item 6C: Phase 1 Design Team update on Summer Learning
Dr. Duffy introduced the Summer Learning Design Team, who presented their Phase 1 progress. Team members Jena Shad, Phil Stern, and Kate Ferber shared their personal motivations and vision for the Summer Learning Academy. They emphasized creating an inclusive, anti-racist, and identity-affirming environment that offers joyful and academically rigorous experiences, focusing on accessibility for all students and igniting curiosity. Examples included addressing enrollment barriers for new refugee students and offering engaging classes like Food Science for credit recovery.
Action Item 8A: Policy Development second reading and vote of policy 515 protection and privacy of people records
Moved by Director Virginia [2:23:00] · Seconded by Director Davis [2:23:00]
The board considered and approved Policy 515, which focuses on student data privacy. The policy had no changes since its first reading. Board members praised the policy for strengthening families' awareness and options regarding their students' privacy, especially given current concerns about data protection.
Action Item 8B: Midyear budget approval for fiscal year 2025
Moved by Director Virginia [2:26:00] · Seconded by Director Davis [2:26:00]
The school board approved the fiscal year 2025 midyear budget as previously presented by Director Magnuson.
Action Item 8C: Budget assumptions approval fiscal year 2026
Dissent: Director William seconded the motion 'reluctantly'.
Moved by Director Anderson [2:27:00] · Seconded by Director William [2:27:00]
The school board approved the fiscal year 2026 budget assumptions as presented. While the motion passed unanimously, the second for the motion was noted as being made 'reluctantly', reflecting underlying concerns expressed during earlier budget discussions.
Notable Quotes (21)
we have been informed that we will be teaching 5.5 sections out of seven next year in a transition year as a means of achieving budget reductions... expecting teachers to teach six classes in a seven period day is an unreasonable expectation and it is a schedule that is rarely used in high schools across the metro area.
what I see as a risk... amongst our students is less time for that type of activity that really adds extrinsic value to our student experience... changes that are coming in as as a result of our strategic plan are being met with some resistance amongst our families.
in a 5.5 model we have less time for everything teaching an additional class might seem reasonable on paper it doesn't work in practice for anyone who has taught a full day knows that this addition is more than one class the labor of love and stress that comes with it is multiplied by the number of young people in the classroom.
I feel blindsided by the scheduled changes that were sent out via email a few weeks ago... I don't see any emails or notices containing information about proposed schedule changes... how were parents to know this was part of the agenda.
the proposed move to 5 and a half out of seven teaching schedule May look small on paper but the human cost is anything but... I was showing up but I was in survival mode.
my biggest concern is the proposed change next year in reducing the frequency of the gym classes so dramatically... from daily... and changing to one to two times per week... the academic studies on this issue have consistently demonstrated that physical activity actually improves performance.
it feels like a false dichotomy to say that we have to support core subjects only through instructional time that these specialty classes are some sort of treat for behaving well it's not true it's all part of a holistic curriculum.
one word blindsided how can a change of this magnitude not have parent feedback... 100% of the parents that I spoke to do not agree with this change.
the school changes are for next school year were made to address two major areas the concerns of low academic achievement and the $2 million budget reduction that was projected and announced in October of 2024.
to be clear increasing instruction in increasing core instruction does not equate to additional screen time for students.
what I continue to hear is that we have been operating as a system of schools and we have made shifts in order to move to a school system.
we are a large outlier in the metro area with such a low fund balance there is no plan in this current budget or recommendation in this current budget to grow the fund balance... if we lose funding we will dip further into that 8% fund balance.
we do expect that to happen right and that is even though we can't predict and so it's it's almost impossible to budget for at this point you know our federal funds account for about $2 million... the governor's budget just proposed a 5% cut in reimbursement of special education Transportation costs.
I think the alarm bells are going off in my head right now about where we are at as a district and as a state for public education and I think the alarm Bells should be going off for people.
This outcome was not met as you can see in the graph here we have across our four elementary schools this is again the early reading fastbridge composite literacy School and you can see in the blue bar is the fall 23% of kids that were at low risk and then in the red is the spring of 24 what kids were in the lowrisk group.
all of these different metrics that are reported here that we need to report to the state are also monitored at at a local level at our sites... when you take a look at those fifth grade teams for example at Aquilla and at Peter Hobart... I see is collective teacher efficacy teacher credibility and Clarity direct instruction classroom discussions.
it's just not good data practice to to say these people have zeros so they you know you don't but they count anyway that doesn't you don't come up with a good average that way it doesn't it doesn't help our system like look at itself to have good data.
we know that we've had many groups come before this board and as they start engaging in phase one I just wanted to kind of introduce their work within the context of thinking of summer learning as an extended school year and an opportunity for us to really dream about what experience we want our students to have in the summer.
my Benchmark for success is going to be to make sure that we uh support and give help to all the families uh that want their students to participate in our programs.
I find a lot of the students that show up in the high school and middle school are the ones that generally kind of disengage um but need a spark something different to attract them to the subject something to ignite an interest and an experience.
I appreciate this coming back and um strengthening uh families awareness and options around their students privacy and their data privacy... there are a lot of really important reasons why families might want to protect their students data right now.
Ordinances & Resolutions (13)
District policy regarding student data privacy, approved by the board.
District's guiding document, referenced in relation to proposed changes and family resistance.
Assessment used to measure kindergarten literacy levels for World's Best Workforce Goal 1.
State assessment used to measure reading and math proficiency and achievement gaps for World's Best Workforce Goal 2.
State assessment referenced alongside MCA for measuring proficiency.
Used to measure college and career readiness for World's Best Workforce Goal 3.
State data source for measuring high school graduation rates for World's Best Workforce Goal 4.
Online resource for community to review school performance data.
Site-specific plans with academic goals, monitored through learning walks and data team meetings.
New math curriculum implemented in Fall 2022, mentioned for its engaging approach.
New reading curriculum implemented in Fall 2023, mentioned for its engaging approach.
Research-based instructional strategies informing district's teaching practices.
Guiding statement for the Summer Learning Academy design team.
Source document
Was this story helpful?
Other Topics from This Document
Superintendent's Report and Explanation of School Changes
Fiscal Year 2025 Midyear Budget and FY2026 Budget Assumptions
World's Best Workforce Goals Reporting
Phase 1 Summer Learning Design Team Update
Policy 515: Protection and Privacy of People Records
Want to know when new stories arrive?
Enter your email to receive updates.
We will not use your email for any other purpose. You can unsubscribe at any time.