Public Comment:
A resident urged the school district to mail taxpayers a detailed explanation of the bonding plans, so tax payers would know that due diligence was done and have the information they need to vote on Nov. 7th.
A resident from Stillwater Township asked why an early childhood development facility was not included in the bond. She questioned a plan to purchase land in Lake Elmo, when land in Stillwater Township costs less than 1/3 as much per acre. She said households most affected by the bond are likely to have students who go to school outside the district.
Another resident supported specific books that others have described as lewd. The resident pointed out that a number of the books are critically acclaimed and were written by authors to challenge their readers. He asked the school board to allow continued access.
The last speaker indicated that the district embraces a dominant progressive worldview, citing that the district refuses to disclose classroom materials and provides vulgar books to minors. The speaker displayed a website called Fixing Stillwater Schools.
Superintendent Report (22:00)
Superintendent Funk displayed a graph indicating the basic formula has not met inflation rates, with a shortfall of about $1600 per pupil. He understands that people look for trust in their leaders. He is responsible for making recommendations to the board about spending tax dollars, and knows this impacts the community. He wants people to know that land purchase options were vetted and that they have tried to make decisions in the most responsible manner possible. Superintendent Funk has been with the district since July, 2022.
Referendum update (31:25)
The bond is proposed to address 3 main objectives: provide more learning space for a
growing enrollment, replace a 100 year- old building, and improve safety and security. A
video about the 1920 Lake Elmo Elementary School was shown with discussion about
this building being the most in need of replacement.
Closed session (45:18) regarding pending litigation in the matter of ISD No. 834 vs. EN
Properties LLC et al.