Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Parents and students urge Elk River board to restore Red Elk jazz stipend

October 14, 2025 | Elk River School District, School Boards, Minnesota


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Parents and students urge Elk River board to restore Red Elk jazz stipend
Parents, students and alumni asked the Elk River School Board on Oct. 13 to reverse a district decision that leaves no stipend available for coaching the Red Elk jazz ensemble at Elk River High School.

Speakers told the board the Red Elk ensemble provides first‑level jazz experience and prepares hundreds of students for higher‑level groups. Dr. Grama Shavaraj, speaking as “a parent and an educator at a state university,” said eliminating the stipend stemmed from union contract negotiations but would sharply reduce student opportunities.

The plea was echoed by current and former students. Ava Larson, a sophomore and former Red Elk member, said the program served “nearly 50 kids in our program,” and gave students with limited time a pathway into jazz. “If we have double nearly triple the amount of students, why shouldn't we have double the amount of bands?” she asked the board.

Kate Bannister, another sophomore, told the board Red Elk offers “authentic jazz instruction, solo opportunities, and fun foundational growth” that is distinct from the district’s more advanced Black Elk band. She said funneling all students into one auditioned ensemble would “make it harder for freshmen to have that same opportunity.”

Dr. Shavaraj and student speakers described Red Elk as an entry point that builds confidence and leads to honor bands and festival appearances. Dr. Shavaraj noted alumni and community ties — including Elk River resident Patrick Dwyer, who played in the high school’s first jazz band in 1966 — as evidence of the program’s longevity and community value.

Board members did not take a vote or announce a follow‑up action during the meeting. Speakers urged the board to “think creatively” and consider district or booster funding to retain coaching support.

The public comment occurred during the board’s designated public comment period; speakers were reminded at the start of the period of the district’s public comment rules under policy 206, including a three‑minute limit and privacy protections for students and staff.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Minnesota articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI