Brainerd school board declines to authorize preparations for operating-levy referendum after hours of public pleas

The Brainerd Public Schools Board of Education voted down a motion to authorize preparations for an operating-levy referendum to be held in November 2025, after a long public-comment period in which parents, teachers, former board members and community groups urged the board to put the question to voters.

Dozens of residents urged the board to allow voters to decide whether to add local operating revenue; speakers said cuts already made have harmed classroom supports, extracurriculars and staff morale. Several said the board had spent public money on a community survey and should act on its results. The motion to authorize preparations for a referendum failed on a 3-3 roll call.

Why it matters: The district is projecting a multi-million-dollar shortfall in its general fund in the coming year and has already enacted cuts. An operating levy would let voters choose to increase local taxes to provide recurring revenue for the district; without that local option the board must find further reductions or rely on uncertain state aid.

Public comment and board debate Kevin Boyles, a former board member and resident, opened public comment by telling the board, “I'm here to tell 7 of you to do your jobs,” and asked the board to give voters a chance to decide whether to approve a levy. Numerous speakers echoed that call: Heidi Hahn, who said she had worked 18 years as an administrator in Brainerd Public Schools, told the board, “We need to give them that voice.” Amy Ajo, a Brainerd educator, said, “This decision isn't about politics. It's about democracy. If the board chooses not to place the operating levy on the ballot, the community is denied the right to weigh in.” Teacher Melissa Schmeck said, “This isn't about blame. It's about solutions,” describing larger class sizes and reduced classroom support.

Superintendent Brandon Grant reviewed the district's recent budgeting work and the difficulties of long-term planning when state funding changes every two years. He told the board, “The ball is in your court,” summarizing his view that the board must decide whether to place the question before voters.

Board members debated timing and consequences. Several trustees said they wanted more time to find additional cost savings and to understand final state funding before asking voters to raise taxes. Other trustees argued the public needed a direct vote because continued cuts would further weaken programs and enrollment.

The motion and the vote The motion on the floor would have authorized district staff to proceed with preparations for an operating-levy referendum to be held in fall…