Anoka-Hennepin certifies preliminary tax levy as administration rolls out $26M reduction plan

The Anoka-Hennepin Public School District board on Sept. 23 unanimously approved a preliminary certification of the district’s tax levy for taxes payable in 2025, and spent much of its meeting discussing a revised set of proposed budget reductions intended to meet a $26 million target across two phases.

Chief Financial Officer Michelle Vargas told the board the preliminary levy for fiscal 2026 represents about a $1.7 million decrease from the previous year — a 1.2% decline — driven largely by statutory calculation changes (including homestead credit adjustments) and a drop in adjusted pupil units of roughly 500 students. Vargas outlined the levy’s components by fund: the general fund projection is down about 1.55%, community services is up roughly 9.19%, and other funds show small shifts. After questions about how those statutory calculations translate to individual homeowners, Vargas said a homeowner whose market value didn’t change could see roughly a 4.5% decrease in district taxes on the preliminary statement; for homes whose values rose, the tax impact varies with the increase.

Following the finance presentation, Superintendent Corey McIntyre laid out the administration’s Phase 2 recommendations and the district’s process. He said Phase 1, approved earlier this year, produced roughly $5.1 million in central-office reductions and $1.1 million in nonpersonnel savings. Phase 2 seeks additional reductions and realignments to reach the combined $26 million target. McIntyre reviewed five options that were considered — including enrollment-based and balanced instructional approaches — and presented an updated recommendation that increases district-office reductions and lowers the targets for elementary, middle and high school levels compared with earlier options.

Key elements of the revised plan include: additional central-office reductions that together with Phase 1 approach $13.75 million; a lowered elementary target that folds in a $1 million adjustment tied to instructional-support positions; a reduced middle- and high-school target; and an emphasis on limiting direct classroom-teacher layoffs where possible. McIntyre said approximately 70% of the proposed $4.2 million elementary reduction would come from non-classroom support (instructional coaches, interventions and enrichment) while about $1.2 million would arise from modest classroom size changes (on the order of roughly one student per elementary classroom under one scenario). At the secondary level, without schedule changes McIntyre estimated class-size increases of about four students at middle school and five at high school in current modeling.

A significant near-term relief item is a legislative student-support aid program the district can use to recode and fund certain social workers, counselors and similar positions outside the general fund. McIntyre and Vargas said recent Minnesota Department of Education clarification allows the district to shift roughly $2 million of positions into that aid category in fiscal 2026, reducing general-fund pressure — though some restrictions apply (the aid requires that staffing counts remain above referenced baselines and cannot be used for some contracted services).

Board members pressed administration for itemized scenarios showing deeper central-office reductions (e.g., examples of what $15M or $18M of cuts would look like), details on specific services that would stop under given reductions, and feasibility assessments for proposed class-size increases given space constraints. McIntyre committed to providing department-level lists, scenario analyses, FAQs and a public engagement schedule. The district will host five community open houses (one at each high school) and an online survey in October; administration expects to return with revisions Oct. 28 and seeks board action in November to align with staffing timelines.

The board approved certifying the maximum preliminary levy as presented by Vargas. Any change to the final levy will be set after additional county auditor calculations and at a December public hearing before the board takes final action on the levy.

Next steps: administration will publish detailed department scenarios and FAQs, hold five community meetings and the October online survey, and bring revised recommendations to the Oct. 28 work session and the November board meeting for action.