After months of debate surrounding the Anoka-Hennepin School District and its budget, the school board passed the 2024-2025 budget on a 4-2 vote during its June 24 meeting.
Its passing was originally in question after an April Facebook post by board member Matt Audette and also signed by board members Linda Hoekman and Zach Arco stated that they could not approve a budget until concerns had been addressed, but Arco voted in favor of the budget on June 24.
“While I share the same concerns as Matt and Linda, I differ with them slightly as I think it is appropriate to vote yes on this budget,” Arco said. “... I agree to pass this budget in good faith that the rest of the board will continue working through these items as they have committed to do.”
The budget was presented by district Chief Financial Officer Michelle Vargas, who has been presenting to the board during the year-long budget process.
In Fiscal Year 2025, the school board will receive $717 million in revenue, a 0.8% increase. Expenditures will increase $743 million, an increase of 2.5%. These numbers were most affected by $11.8 million in federal COVID-19 relief funds being fully expended, but was also offset by $4 million in property taxes and $9.5 million in new state revenue.
This leads to a $11.5 million operating deficit, which leaves the unassigned fund balance at $41.2 million, or 7.7% of the district’s operating budget. Fund balance policy says to strive to meet 10%, Vargas said, but it is not a hard requirement.
The food service fund increased $1.3 million due to state changes in free lunch programs, while expenditures increased $4.75 million for increased supply costs and $2.4 million in equipment upgrades. Vargas said this was done intentionally to spend down the projected food service fund balance of 46.3%. If not spent, the state has the option to decrease its revenue to the district under federal law, Vargas said.
The community service fund is in a similar position, with an intentional spend down of $324,000 coming from the 26.8% fund balance. The capital improvements fund will hit $0 this year, as intended, as several media center and science classroom projects reach their completion dates in the upcoming school year. The district’s trust fund budget remains stable.
“It’s pretty obvious where I’m at on the vote for the budget itself,” Audette said prior to voting. “... I believe strongly that approving the districts operating budget is effectively giving my approval of spending on all of the things (therein). So, knowing I have serious concerns with so many things, it’s not been possible for me to do it in the previous two years on this board. I’ve never been able to vote for a budget.”
Both in the April Facebook post and during that night’s meeting, Audette brought up his objections to several issues he saw in the district concerning Social-Emotional Learning; Diversity, Equity and Inclusion; Standards Based Grading, “divisive” classroom teachings and district policy on transgender students, among other topics.
He did not feel these concerns were appropriately addressed prior to the vote and still saw them present in the district. He referenced the $21 million in projected cuts the district is looking to make ahead of the 2026-2025 school year in his response.
“... I’ll be looking for a disparate impact based on the broad spectrum of cultural-war related topics that are going to need to be cut,” Audette said. “They won’t take up the $21 million in cuts — God, I hope they won’t, actually I doubt that they will. They’re going to need significant action or I know that I’ll be here (next year) in the exact same place, getting ready to vote no for the fourth time on a budget. And I hope that’s not where I am.”
Hoekman agreed, saying she could not vote for “untested and unmeasurable” practices. Following work session discussions about the topics on April 23, June 10 and 11, she felt the district is spending “excessive time, money and district resources” on such topics.
“I will not change my belief that all students suffer when placed in classrooms that lack structure due to loose curricular goals and unclear outcomes like those in SEL, Equity Achievement, Standards Based Grading and Problem-Based Learning,” Hoekman said. “... For these reasons I cannot support this budget.”
Arco, while supporting the budget and saying he would trust that conversations regarding these topics will continue, said he would not consistently vote that way if he did not see those promises acted upon.
“If in the course of these continued discussions (lack of change) continues to be the case, I will use my position as a member of this board to hold the district accountable,” Arco said. “This will lead to future gridlock, future division — things that nobody really wants to have happen. But at this point, given the work that’s been made … I will pass this budget pending that we can continue to work on these items and find a path forward that this board can support.”
Board Member Michelle Langenfeld asked if such changes would be able to take place on the 2025-2026 budget, to which Vargas applied in the affirmative — either on a mid-year budget amendment or proposed budget amendment.
“The timing of this is really unfortunate,” Langenfeld said. “Because I believe that if we have a little more time here we’d be in a different place where (now) people are feeling they can’t support this budget. As we know, we have great concerns without a budget. We have a responsibility to make sure … our district moves forward.”
Board Member Kacy Deschene added in addition to the statute-mandated responsibility to pass a budget, this year’s budget also follows “the line of 22 years of recognized financial excellence in transparency and fiscally responsible management at this district.”
She added that none of the concerns Audette, Hoekman or Arco brought up are substantially represented in the budget.
“For the discussions we have been having in our extended work sessions, in those long and late meetings, I think it’s become clear that actually nothing on that list of items represents any significant budget amount,” Deschene said. “The vast majority of those items are policy or procedure items. (There is a) strong commitment to addressing them, but it’s important to acknowledge, as Director Audette said, they’re not going to get us anywhere close to $21 million we have to cut.”
Deschene said that a “no” vote to the budget would affect the school environment, construction projects and employee salaries and health benefits, along with summer childcare for district parents.
“I think we also need to realize that attempting to use this budget discussion and vote as a lever for some political ideas or ‘cultural wars’ that you view as being constantly talked about and brought up — because you’ve asked for them to be brought up and talked about — is not respectful of our 8,000 staff,” Deschene said.
Deschene reaffirmed the board’s commitment to keep a focus on these items even as the budget vote would come to pass and set the district’s sights on the next one.
“I think that the commitment that has been demonstrated by every person sitting up here at this table to give thoughtful, factual conversation about these items is significant, and it’s important work,” Deschene said. “We’re all committed to continue that work. Using the budget as a means to express dissatisfaction with that work is a choice, but it’s a choice that represents harm.”
District Executive Director of Communication and Public Relations Jim Skelly said that the district’s legal counsel advised that if the budget was not approved by July 1, the district would have “no authority to authorize expenditures which would require a complete district shutdown after that date.”
That would include “temporary furlough of all employees, no ability to meet payroll obligations, complete shutdown of summer school and Adventures Plus school-age child care programming, immediate stoppage of construction projects in district facilities, suspension of facility rentals and field use,” and “no ability to maintain or protect taxpayer investment in district facilities for daily operations.”
Most Popular
Comments / 0