Citizen Portal
Sign In

Board approves 2026–27 and 2027–28 school calendars after discussion about religious holidays

Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan School Board (District 196) · December 9, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Sign Up Free
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a second reading, the board approved calendars that move start dates earlier (Aug. 31 for 2026–27, Aug. 30 for 2027–28), shift staff data-analysis days to March and add mid-April no-school days; members asked that religious-holiday impacts and partial-absence patterns be examined in a workshop.

The Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan school board approved the 2026–27 and 2027–28 school calendars following a second reading and discussion of attendance data and religious-holiday scheduling.

Joel Milteer, director of human resources, described the recommended changes: for 2026–27 the district will start Aug. 31 (instead of Sept. 1), move a staff data-analysis day to March 10, shift spring break to March 29–April 2 and add April 23 as a no-school day. For 2027–28 the proposed start is Aug. 30; the district added Dec. 22 to extend winter break to eight days, moved the teacher data-analysis day to March 17, and added April 21 as a no-school day. Milteer said those changes were intended to align with regional calendars, reduce long stretches of full five-day weeks late in the year and respond to patterns in high-school absenteeism.

Board members thanked staff for the data-driven approach but raised concerns about how the calendar accommodates observance of religious holidays. Catherine asked that the district consider Yom Kippur and suggested analyzing partial absences or late arrivals tied to religious observances; Milteer said the district reviewed attendance data and offered to explore alternatives and bring the subject to a future board workshop.

With discussion concluded, Jackie moved approval; Katherine seconded. The motion carried 7-0.

Board members noted that, because families already request calendars, the board preferred approving the calendars now and using a workshop to consider possible future adjustments rather than reopening the current calendars immediately.