Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board leans toward November ballot for capital projects levy as state funding transfers remain uncertain
Summary
The Moorhead Area Public Schools board discussed whether to seek a special election in August or November for a capital projects levy. District staff warned August is risky because state decisions on funding transfers may not be final by the May 30 notification deadline; the board expressed tentative preference for November.
The Moorhead Area Public Schools board on April 28 discussed timing and tradeoffs for a possible special election on a capital projects levy and whether to await potential state funding transfers that could reduce or eliminate the need for a local vote.
Dr. Lunick, Superintendent, explained the district has two near‑term election windows: an August special election (second Tuesday in August) or a November election. He said a statutory May 30 notification deadline for the auditor makes August difficult if the state education omnibus bill is still under negotiation; the district could misjudge the need for a levy if transfers are approved after that deadline. Dr. Lunick said an August election therefore is not his current recommendation.
Dr. Lunick described a bill staff identified as HF 957 (the transcript references "9 57"), and noted the narrower funding‑transfer language was pulled out of House File 6. He said the transfers, if enacted, could reduce or eliminate the need to go to voters. The administration also told the board that running an independent election could exceed $50,000 in costs.
Board members generally favored waiting for more certainty from the Legislature. Cassidy (board member) said August "would be out for us" because the window is too short; other members agreed November offered a more workable timeline. Staff warned the choice affects levy timing: a later election can push levy revenue collection into a later fiscal year (for example, a November 2026 vote would affect the levy year collected in 2027–28).
Dr. Lunick asked board members to contact legislators in support of separating funding transfers from mandate relief language where possible. The board did not take a binding vote at the meeting but indicated consensus to pursue a November election if they decide to go forward.
