Observer Report: Northfield School Board Meeting, 8.25.25

Northfield Public Schools, School Board Meeting
August 25, 2025
Meeting Video Recording

1. Call to Order by Board Chair Claudia Gonzalez-George at 6:00 pm. All board members present.
   
2. Agenda Approval/Table File approved unanimously (see Board Packet and Table File)
   
3. Public Comment -No public comments were made.
   
4. Announcements and Recognitions
   1. Dr. Matt Hillman, Superintendent, shared that the MN Star Tribune published list of best athletes from last 25 years. Northfield’s own 2015 graduate Bailey Dupay was on list for diving and gymnastics. Congratulations!

5. Items for Discussion and Reports
   1. Northfield Community Education Improvement Showcase: Erin Bailey, Director of Community Education, gave an overview of the powerpoint included in the board packet (pages 15 to 27). A narrative report of next year’s goals was also on pages 8 to 14. Additional comments beyond the powerpoint and narrative report included:
      1. Goals are broken out by program areas so that staff can see their work clearly in those goals.
      2. Under “Academic goals”:
         1. Birth to Age 5 Special Education –reminded that this serves both district programs but also wherever the children are (homes, daycares, etc.) 
         2. Pointed out that in ECFE the goals are for both children and parents. 
      3. Under “Employee Satisfaction”: that not all staff necessarily have annual reviews since not all are teaching staff. 
      4. Under “Parent satisfaction” goal: Reminded board that NCEC staff are in unique position in that they see parents every day who often give feedback through these interactions and they’re always providing encouragement to fill out the survey, too. Bailey invited board members to Truck and Tractor night, the first family engagement event! 
      5. Questions from the board:
         1. Board Member Amy Goerwitz thanked Bailey and noted how much she loved Truck and Tractor Night. Goerwitz asked how it’s defined on who gets the employee engagement survey? Bailey shared that survey goes to “regular” employee (school-year or year-round basis). For instance, rec staff do not give feedback on this particular survey (although they have other means to provide feedback). Goerwitz asked about the IEP goals and clarification on the percentages provided. Bailey shared that they want to see 100% students who show growth, and 80% are achieving all of their IEP goals. 
         2. Gonzalez-George inquired if IEP goals carry over from year to year, they wouldn’t count as having been achieved? Bailey confirmed that yes, that’s correct. 
         3. Board member Jenny Nelson wished to know more about parent survey. Does the survey includes both Hand in Hand and Early Ventures? Bailey answered affirmatively that yes it’s both segments. Nelson inquired about % of parents who completed most recent survey? Bailey did some quick math and shared that out of approximately 300 families they had 63 complete it last year. Bailey said they have tired to push it but acknowledged that some parents give verbal feedback often daily. Nelson asked how the survey is anonymous. Bailey noted that the parents don’t put their name on the survey. Nelson inquired if the survey is only available via email? Yes, it’s only available via a link. Nelson replied wondering if there had ever been a written survey? Bailey shared that follow-up surveys for most Comm. Ed classes, ABE, and a few other programs do have opportunity for written comment.
         4. Board member Corey Butler inquired whether the NCEC’s Multi-Purpose Community Facility Projects grant was a state grant or federal grant? Bailey replied that this was a state grant funded by federal dollars. Butler asked if the district has the money in hand? Bailey answered that there is a signed agreement in hand which means the district can start spending. Bailey further explained that they are working with Wold Construction to go out for bids later this year and work would occur next summer. Funds need to be expended by Dec. 2026. Butler asked if Bailey was comfortable with where we’re at? Answer: Yes!
         5. Butler followed with question about the 21^st Century Learning Grant for community school—what happens if we don’t have approval since the current grant runs out August 31? Bailey acknowledged that this is where careful planning over the last several years has put district in a good spot. We now have blended and braided a number of grants both from NPS and other local organizations. In addition, students eligible for targeted services can also be reimbursed for expenses from the state. State does now require us to keep those funds in separate account. So there are funds currently available to keep those programs going. 
         6. Board Member Maggie Epstein was reminded from the news that the group of incoming kindergartners were born during COVID. To Bailey: What are you seeing in NCEC for kids set to go to K? What kinds of programming was really helpful for them? Are you seeing differences for younger kids? Bailey acknowledged that there is an overall lower population this year in NCEC due to lower birthrates in COVID. The demographic impacts are already happening in NCEC! In recent cohorts we see that they’re less used to being in group settings and less likely to have had experiences outside from home. Epstein followed-up with question about where students in NCEC come from and how is information shared about the district so they come to NPS? Anyone delivered in Northfield Hospital get info on Baby Talk, an NCEC program, and Community Education has tracked who comes to Baby Talk with who ends up matriculating to the NPS. Dr. Hillman also sends a card to every child born. Also, NCEC has families who might work in Northfield but don’t live here who attend NCEC, but as they approach kindergarten, they start to share out more info with all families on open houses, events, etc. Bailey remarked that they have seen that it increases their likelihood to enroll in the district!
         7. Board Member Ben Miller remarked how it’s always impressive to look at the portfolio of Community Education! ABE has gone up year after year. What class or content has driven this? Bailey first gave many kudos to Clarice Grabau! Bailey next offered that they’ve seen an increase in morning classes, often a combo of older adults and adults working in second or third shift job. In addition, they’ve begun to offer driver’s ed in Spanish and GED testing in Northfield. While being a great service, it shows there’s a way to make this a full circle experience here in Northfield. ABE has also added summer sessions to be closer to year-round. Since funding is based on previous year’s contact hours, this growth has allowed them to keep expanding. Miller asked how changes and cuts to SNAP have impacted food shelf use? Bailey noted that there’s always a line when the food shelf is opened. Partly sees some community building for frequent visitors, but the group is also not as big as last year. Cuts on CAC’s side have driven frequency to be reduced. Miller inquired if there were updates on Early Ventures (enrollment, aligning with fees, etc.)? Bailey shared that from enrollment this spring they could add a second infant and toddler room—still a waitlist. Yet for first time in Bailey’s 12 year tenure there are opening in the year before K classroom (due to birthrates plus more offerings like voluntary preK which is free). That said it hasn’t gotten any cheaper to run childcare center, so still seeing increased expenses that are outpacing income. Bailey has been working with Finance Director Valorie Mertesdorf since July and are working on recommendations for changes in fee structures to share with families to share out in January. 
   2. Spring Creek Elementary School Improvement Showcase: Principal Tania Will shared the powerpoint shared in the board packet (pages 32 to 43). A narrative report of next year’s goals was also on pages 28 to 31. Additional comments beyond the powerpoint and narrative report included:
      1. Highlight #1: Bridges Math Implementation—Will gave a shout out to the instructional team for their support! Noted that the strategies and teaching techniques pushed many teachers outside of their comfort zone, but in reflections teachers had an overall positive experience. Will noted has she been involved in various curriculum rollouts, and this one was the best! The second page reviewed instructional observation (page 38 in board packet) across four domains, but noted that the data was district wide and not exclusively Spring Creek. 
      2. Highlight #2: Positive School Culture: Multi Tiered Systems of Support (MTTS) identified areas for growth, including sense of belonging for all stakeholders. Became a priority as supporting attendance works hand in hand with belonging. Will and other staff visited other elementary schools to see what they were doing and drafted a new plan for this upcoming year. Will explained that for surveys a Top 2 response= strongly agreeing or agreeing. 
      3. Highlight # 3: Inclusive Playground Planning: Will shared the process, starting with a small work group made initial recommendations, PTO meetings where feedback was solicited, and finally student input. Appreciated partnership with PTO and appears to be on track for completion by the first day of school! 
      4. Goals
         1. Strengthen Tier 1 Instruction:  Will noted that the graphs show that there is growth that needs to be made for proficiency goal of 80% in reading and math. While the numbers are above district and state, still strides to be made. Will noted that they’ll leverage MTSS, while classroom teachers will continue to monitor formative assessments to meet students where they are at. 
         2. Proactive Positive Behavior Systems, named “Star Celebrations”: Photos showed some of groundwork laid last year at an all school meeting and another at a staff meeting to promote teamwork. Also heard students feedback on belonging! Will shared a short video presentation, “What does it mean to be a SC star?” that featured several students. Will also mentioned that aiming to increase employee satisfaction is part of this goal. 
         3. Learning is a High Priority: Caught Will by surprise that it wasn’t higher! Wants to improve number of parents who give Top 2 response. At the end of day, the “STAR Send-off” will work to solidify daily learning through reflection and recaps. 
      5. Questions
         1. Epstein asked what “low floor, high ceiling” meant in Bridges Math curriculum. Will shared that the approach shares a situation that allows students to enter from multiple access points instead of a teacher explaining the “correct” way to do something. If you know this piece, what else (low)? If you know this, this, and this, where else can this take you (high)? Will shared that from what she has observed this approach just feels so authentic and students have shared that it doesn’t feel like math. Teachers are now in a spot to deliver curriculum as is. Will acknowledged that next they’d like to work with teachers to help prepare them for next responses to guide students. 
         2. Miller asked about the Tier 1 goa  of 80% academic proficiency. Is that just tied to MCA’s? Would that not touch upon every grade? In the absence of every grade are there other measures to consider? Hillman shared that yes, only grades 3-5 have MCAs, yet this goal would not look solely at one assessment to understand achievement. Could also use curriculum assessments, Fastbridge etc. Hillman reiterated that people will hear this 80% goal over and over to combat perfectionism as well as super precise goals. Hillman shared that what they’re trying to do is create more of a growth mindset regardless of the assessments used to help balance different growth rates of different students. Hillman notes that only subjects we have metrics for are reading, math, and science with MCAs. So looking at a variety of assessments allows other subjects to create benchmarks. Mindset becomes a more important part of a school improvement plan. Miller asked if we can expect to see more data as this progresses? Hillman answered yes. Will also shared that she loves the 100% growth measure for all students. 
         3. Goerwitz: first said she loved the idea of a daily recap that does so many good things! Second, asked for some explanations on highlight #1: under High Quality math content—only yes or no answers are given. Why no middle ground? Under the student ownership it sort of improved but less in strong category. Thoughts on why? Will said that there was a lot of conversation around this. High quality math content content—yes/no had to do with 10-minute observation was specific. It was “yes” if the observation had math AND if the math was considered to be high-quality. Occasionally a teacher might be doing a math activity (making gingerbread cookies by putting in fractional amounts), but a teacher might read a book about this. Great connection, but not considered high quality math content. Student ownership—this is what came out of the conversations. At beginning, a shift in mindset of what instruction (and good instruction) is, the observers may have been more lenient, but as views on this changed and the observers learned more about “ownership” (i.e., student doing most of the work and able to talk mathematically), the observers were more precise later on. Will believes that this will improve year after year. Goerwitz wanted to follow up with Ben’s question. Are you actively going to gym, art, Social Studies teachers on how will they determine goals and 80% proficiency? Will responded that during PLC time this will be one of the things that all PLCs will be considering. Everyone’s thinking about what 80% looks like! Also possible they’d work within disciplines across grade levels but also within grade bands across schools to figure this out. Teaching staff can see possibility of getting there, and the 80% feels doable. 
         4. Nelson asked about goal #1 from the narrative. How are the individual student needs and action steps identified? Will shared that individual students needs are often brought forth by a teacher who sees a student is struggling. Problem solving team will look at this and develop plan for proceeding. Can also happen at MTSS team and looking at screenings to ensure that eligible students are getting services and interventions. Nelson remarked that this is a big process of identifying students and creating action steps. How often does this happen? Will shared that the problem solving team meets weekly, sometimes twice a week if needed. MTSS school leadership team met 2X/month for one hour. Team thought they could be more efficient this year, so will be meeting 90 minutes once a month. 
         5. Butler acknowledged that last year was a whirlwind and congrats on shedding the interim title. How was Bridges Math received by staff at the end of the year? Will said in the midst they would hear it was a lot of work. At the end of the year they heard from the teachers that it was worth it. Not every person, but general response. Teachers had great support and teachers are believing in it. When Dr. Hillman was talking about perfectionist piece, Will said that this applies to implementing new curriculum! Will senses so much comfort going into this year. There were a few pieces that Math work team are working through based on feedback. Staff appreciated being heard and make thoughtful decisions over the summer.  
   3. Superintendent’s 2025-2026 Focus Areas: Gonzalez reminded that these are in draft form. Hillman reviewed the five areas in the board packet (pages 45 to 46).
      1. Hillman acknowledged that there are some goals that will stretch across years, including goal #1 for prioritizing career and technical education. He reminded the board of the positive progress made last year to deliver on this for the 2026-27 year. 
      2. #2 (systems adaptation) will be difficult to measure. There are a lot of things to accomplish with fewer people. Hillman emphasized that we need to think about what we can no longer do, where to find efficiencies, and adapt systems to new realities. Can use some qualitative data, like “leader rounding” and keep pulse on staff. Hillman affirmed that NPS is not giving up on commitments, but will need to do things differently. Might not have #s to back up this goal, but experience tells him that this priority is critical. 
      3. #3: AI Development Academy uses two successful previous professional development models (leadership academy from last year and “tech champs” idea from way back, aka a few teachers from each building to get additional training and then would teach others how to use the tools). Up to 20 people in the district—teachers and other staff. Most successful initial of AI uses might be in administrative tasks. Hillman reminded that in classrooms where we’re preparing students for lifelong success—generative AI will be a part of their lives. 
      4. #4: Investigate declining enrollments. Hillman emphasized that we can’t just continue to say it’s declining enrollment anymore; we need more information on why. Marketing has been discussed, but acknowledged that NPS’s rural location puts us at geographic disadvantage. First, Hillman would lead an enrollment study to look at families who choose to open enroll to NPS. What can we learn? How could we use that for marketing? Hillman noted that NPS is the ast public school charter authorizer in the state and have long been strategic partners with Arcadia and Prairie Creek. But for students who choose another option—what do those places offer that parents feel is different or better than what we offer? This priority will take a multicomponent approach. Wants to do focus groups to get lots of info, but time intensive. How can we get a critical mass of survey responses? Hillman reminded that we can’t control housing or birth rate, but can look at reasons why families chose to come to NPS (or not), and to discern what is perception and what is reality. We might do this study and there might be no actionable data, but it shows the community that we’re trying to learn more. 
      5. #5: Invite all parents to seek feedback to improve BIPOC student achievement. Hillman is disappointed by lack of progress, although noted that it was not for lack of trying. 
      6. And footnote also reminds people that we’re in process of building a building!
      7. Feedback:
         1. Goerwitz shared that 5 focus areas is a lot! Official groups say 2-3 is what you should look at, but acknowledged that after 9 years on the board has seen Dr. Hillman do 5 focus areas before and work very hard. Thanked Dr. Hillman for dedication. Goerwitz asked Hillman to consider a replacement focus area to seriously look again at later start times for the high school, possibly over two years, using the investigation from late 2010s and what other schools’ impact have been who have shifted in the first year, then planning for implementation in year 2, with implementation in 2027-28. Goerwitz reminded the board that she also understood that this idea would be more feasible when new high school was reimagined. 
         2. Nelson asked about school to work: when would materials or info be ready for HS students as registration is in early February? Hillman answered that it would have to be in advance of the course catalog printing. Goal would be to have materials ready by late Nov/early Dec. Will work with HS so they understand what they are signing up for. Nelson pointed out that this is a new program, so no students would have done it before to share info with others. Hillman shared that there’s feast or famine with new courses. Sometimes they take off, but others take time to germinate due to the lack of background. Hillman acknowledged that this idea might take longer for students to understand what this means. Nelson thanked Hillman for the work done and followed up with question on AI academy and who would lead it. Hillman said that he would lead it, but unlike leadership academy, since there is a thriving AI community already, plus partnerships with colleges and professionals within the district, to possibly help give insights on instruction, writing prompts, ethics of AI, etc. Hillman will orchestrate but not lead teach. Nelson asked if the enrollment study will be shared with board? Yes, will share in board report or in a work session. Hillman reiterated that he wouldn’t propose if he didn’t set aside time to collectively make sense of it. If things are actionable out of it, then will need to prioritize those actions. 
         3. Miller: follow-up on Amy’s comment on later start times for district. What would a plan for a plan look like as there are lots of dependencies and things can get complicated quickly? Also, Miller acknowledged that admin capacity is less moving forward, but wants to be mindful of the process and ensure that this topic would be time well spent. Milled inquired about the leadership academy: any reflections? What’s the cadence? Hillman shared that it gives him professional energy to develop others. This ranks up there as one of the best things we’ve done. Excited about potential for leaders. Data showed that it went well. Cadence would be every other year so it doesn’t fizzle out. Academy model brings together people who have expressed interest in the topic which can have a positive cascading effect. 
         4. Epstein supported the AI academy as a good focus area. Would it be more specific in the document so that it is clearly for staff and teachers, not students? Hillman said yes and also shared that in the leadership academy there were many non-teachers, and see the same piece for the AI academy. Generative AI could provide tremendous support opportunities!
         5. Butler shared that he is comfortable with what’s proposed so far, but is mulling over what Goerwitz said. No specific thoughts, would still like to learn more, and would propose that the board has a work session on later start times to determine if it’s something to pursue as a focus area before deciding. 
         6. Goerwitz shared that she failed to mention which goal to let go of if moving forward. Goerwitz remarked that while all are valuable, she thinks the enrollment study might not be worthwhile at this time. Anticipates more HS enrollment due to reimagining, therefore date collected might only be valuable at elementary level once new HS is up and running. Reiterated that so much work has already been done. She reminded that few previous board members and community members doubted importance of this issue, but logistics stood in the way before that are now gone (aka no more left hand turns due to traffic circles.) Goerwitz remarked that NPS is 30 years past leading edge of this and that it is time to see if we can do this for our students. 
         7. Board Member Jeff Quinnell offered point about later start times and how it comes up every so often. Maybe some nuances to investigate with changing times and to see if there’s enough support there to make the changes. But if talking about focus areas for the superintendent, this might beyond the scope. Offered that if the board wanted to investigate, the board could always bring forth through a motion. 
         8. Gonzalez-George liked the focus area on systems-adaptations because it speaks to recognizing that it’s different now. Adaptation with support instead of sink-or-swim. It’s caring and responsible to acknowledge that people are having to change their way of doing things. Gonzalez-Goerge likes studying enrollment as it calls attention to a main funding source (per pupil funding from state). Agrees with Goerwitz that things will change when HS is done, but could highlight areas that they could move on now. Also shared that she had kids enrolled in previous district with later start times and would support revisiting since 5 of 7 current board members weren’t a part of the previous conversation. Likes idea of work session to investigate and determine steps after that. 

6. Consent Agenda approved unanimously without discussion.
   1. Minutes
   2. Gift Agreements
   3. Financial Report – March 2025 
   4. Personnel Items
      
7. Items for Individual Action—No items were on the agenda for individual action.
   
8. Items for Information
   1. Construction Update No. 14 (page 58 of the board packet). Will let report stand, but alerted board that Wold will be visiting to make a presentation at the Sept. 22 board meeting. Wold will roll out initial drawings to core group on Sept. 9, HS students shortly thereafter, before finally releasing to public. Hillman said he suspects it will exceed expectations!
      
   2. Staff Breakfast Program: Gonzalez shared that it will be Aug 26, 7 AM will provide welcome back breakfast. Board welcome to attend.
      
9. Future Meetings
   1. Monday, September 8, 2025, 6:00 p.m., Regular Board Meeting, Northfield DO Boardroom 
   2. Monday, September 22, 2025, 6:00 p.m., Regular Board Meeting, Northfield DO Boardroom 
   3. Tuesday, October 14, 2025, 6:00 p.m., Regular Board Meeting, Northfield DO Boardroom *Note that Monday, October 13, 2025 is Indigenous Peoples’ Day

10. Adjournment at 7:49 PM.

Submitted by Alyssa Melby, Observer, League of Women Voters