Clouds gather over district’s financial optimism

In early February the district projected revenue increases of $17 million in 2023-24 against spending increases of $9 million, leaving $8 million in new reserves to help stabilize future budgets.

But as the 2023 legislative session proceeds, proposals at the Capitol are threatening to raise costs and eat away at the margin of surplus, according to officials.

One proposal alone, to increase teacher prep time, would force the district to add more than 50 new full-time teaching positions at a cost of about $5 million, said Stacey Sovine, executive director of administrative services.

“After reviewing some of the proposals being considered by the state Legislature, I’m feeling much, much more cautious” about February’s optimism, Superintendent Theresa Battle told the Burnsville-Eagan-Savage School Board at a March 9 workshop.

Generous new funding proposals remain intact, with an increase of up to 5% in the per-pupil aid formula and other money earmarked for reducing districts’ cross-subsidy spending on mandatory special education and English language programs, Battle said.

“Unfortunately, other proposals will increase new and ongoing mandates that will eat into those increases,” she said.

A bill that appears headed for approval guaranteeing free school meals for students of all incomes will have “immense” benefits for students and families, Battle said.

“Unfortunately, the unintended consequence is that fewer families will complete the application for educational benefits, which is what determines how much compensatory aid our district and other districts receive,” she said.

At the very least, a change in the formula for compensatory aid appears to forecast a $600,000 revenue loss for District 191, Battle said.

“There are other proposals that could affect us significantly, including a class size mandate, new graduation requirements that would diminish space for student choice, and new unemployment rules that would increase costs significantly without providing additional funding,” the superintendent said.

The bill to add more prep time based on a teachers’ minutes of daily instruction would upset a typical high school teacher’s schedule of five classroom periods, one prep period and one period of supervision duties, Sovine said.

Under the bill, both nonclassroom periods could become prep time, removing teachers from study halls and other supervisory duties and forcing more hiring, he said.

A proposed $25 minimum wage for hourly school employees would pose “quite a bit of cost” and alter salary schedules under which many workers hit $25 after a few years on the job anyway, Sovine said.

“So while $25 may be a minimum wage established by the state, it may also find itself being a maximum, because otherwise you’re not going to be able to balance your budgets,” he said.

A bill making some currently ineligible school workers eligible for summer unemployment insurance could remove incentives for workers to help out during summer school, Sovine said.

A proposal making class size a potential subject for contract negotiations “will put districts into an awkward bind in trying to manage their budgets going forward,” he said.

There’s also a proposal to increase districts’ contributions to employees’ family insurance plans and limit employees’ out-of-pocket expenses.

A total of 136 bills affecting schools had been introduced as of March 9, according to the district.

Officials’ initial optimism was fueled by the expected state aid, a possibly emerging trend toward enrollment stabilization in the district and the last $8 million in the district’s federal pandemic aid being available for 2023-24.

Battle said she’ll bring the board her recommended budget on March 23. Public comment opportunities are planned for March and April, with a final budget presentation on June 8 and board approval on June 22.

Board will allow recording during listening sessions

Reversing an earlier vote, the School Board voted 6-0 March 9 to allow audio and video recording

during board listening sessions.

The board approved on first reading a policy on public participation that doesn’t prohibit recording during the sessions, which are presided over by two members and are not official board meetings.

A recording ban was included in a first reading of the policy the board approved on Jan. 26. Supporters said it was needed to safeguard privacy rights of students and staff members. The board’s Policy Review Committee endorsed the change.

Board Chair Scott Hume cast the lone vote against it, citing free-speech concerns.

The policy committee revisited the matter on Feb. 28, supporting a revision that allows the board to end a session where audio or video recordings “are being made and when such recordings may present a barrier to participation.”

“We don’t want to say, ‘Absolutely no recording,’ ” said Board Member Safio Mursal, a policy committee member. “That’s not really the purpose. It’s just so we don’t drive public participation away.”