Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Human Resources Counseling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cloquet board deadlocks on proposal to allow social workers to fill elementary counselor role
Summary
A 3-3 vote rejected a resolution that would have declared an elementary guidance counselor position available for recall and clarified that the district would accept either a licensed guidance counselor or a licensed school social worker for the post following an unexpected resignation.
Get email alerts on the Human Resources Counseling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Cloquet Public School District board voted 3-3 on Aug. 25, rejecting a resolution that would have declared an elementary guidance counselor position available for recall and directed administration to offer the opening to employees on unrequested leave of absence (ULA), while explicitly allowing a licensed school social worker to fill the role.
Superintendent Dr. Michael Carey told the board the late resignation by an elementary counselor prompted the discussion about whether a social worker could perform the elementary-level work. Carey said elementary counselor duties and licensed school social worker duties “are very, very comparable” and that principals in the district were comfortable with the possibility of filling the vacancy with a social worker. He noted differences remain at the high school level, where “you really wanna keep those high school positions, specifically guidance counselors,” because of graduation, career and college advising functions.
Board members debated the practical and licensing questions the change raised. Some members voiced concern about whether a licensed social worker may be allowed under state rules to provide tier‑1 classroom instruction — social‑emotional learning (SEL) lessons given to full classes — or whether an out‑of‑field placement (a temporary variance) would be required. Carey said the district believed a licensed school social worker could implement SEL and behavior interventions, and that the district would pursue an out‑of‑field placement if necessary.
The resolution under consideration was procedural: it would have formally announced that the counselor/social‑worker position was available for recall and directed administration to contact staff on ULA about the vacancy. The board debated whether posting the job as open to social workers would undermine recall rights or create instability for those currently on leave. Carey explained recall rights under the district’s contract: employees who decline an offer lose recall rights unless they provide written proof from their current employer that they could not be released in time.
After discussion, the board took a roll-call style vote that produced a 3-3 split, which the chair announced as a failed motion. Because the resolution failed, the superintendent said the district would leave the vacancy posted as a guidance counselor position and continue processing applicants against that posting.
Board members who spoke included several who asked for clarity about the licensing differences and the potential need for an out‑of‑field approval from the Minnesota Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board (PELSB). The superintendent said he and the principal had consulted licensing materials and were comfortable pursuing the social‑worker option if the board later supported it.
The decision leaves the district pursuing the vacancy under its existing guidance counselor posting while the administration monitors applicants and the status of employees on ULA.

