Minneapolis Public Schools Board, At-Large Seats: Candidate Forum
Sean: Today we have three of the candidates for the two at-large seats on the Minneapolis Public Schools board. This is a citywide race that will be decided on November 3. There is also a District 1 seat open, and we plan to have a forum with those candidates next week. Our guests today are Christin Crabtree, Michael Baskins, and Stephanie Johnson, who will be joining us later in the show. Thank you all for being here. We also want to recognize incumbent candidate and board chair Collin Beachy, who was unable to join us today due to travel. His responses to our questions can be found after the interview transcript. Tane, I’m hoping you can get us started.
Tane: Thank you for being here. Obviously, one of the things that is very front of mind for everyone in the district is the transformation plan. The district is no longer proposing to close up to 16 schools; that was taken off the table. But I want to start with a simple yes or no from each of you: Would you have voted for any of the three proposals the district put forward before they were taken off the table? Michael Baskins, I’ll start with you.
Michael: No, I would not have voted for any of the proposals.
Tane: Straightforward. Christin Crabtree?
Christin: No, I would not have voted for any of the proposals.
Sean: Even if you wouldn’t have voted for any of those proposals, I want to ask about the status quo, which is having to close really big budget gaps three years running. $39 million is the smallest budget gap, and $110 million is the largest in the past three years. The first budget that the newly elected school board would be in charge of is for the 2027–2028 school year. We’ll start with Christin. What is the first thing you would push for in that budget if you were elected?
Christin: Honestly, I would like to see the district continue reviewing the audit findings they’ve had with their finance department. I’d like to see increased oversight and ongoing audit activity, so it’s not just an annual thing. We should be doing that work throughout the school year so we’re preventing findings from happening in the first place. And when findings do happen, we should be resolving them and reviewing processes and procedures to ensure accuracy from our finance department. There have been findings of millions of dollars left on the table over several years, and that’s simply unacceptable.
Beyond that, I would also look at ways to improve our enrollment process. At the student placement office this year, we saw lines around the block at the Davis Center. In the past, there were something like 10 employees in that office. In recent years, there have only been five, and this year four were on leave when school was starting. That’s a predictable annual thing. So we need to make sure we’re resourcing that office well so we’re welcoming our families in. Looking at opportunities like that is really important before we go to the nuclear option of closing 16 schools.
Sean: Michael Baskins, the same question to you. What are your first priorities for the first budget you’d be in charge of?
Michael: One of the things that makes it really hard to talk about the budget is the lack of transparency the district has had about its finances and its struggles. That’s one of the main reasons I’m running for school board: to use the board’s oversight responsibilities to bring to light a lot of the financial issues the district has.
Even after deciding not to close schools, the district has said it still has serious financial issues to address. But when it comes to describing those to the public — what is the long-term impact of not closing these schools? What are the true financial stressors they see coming down the pike? — they’re not being transparent. So at this point, it’s hard to say where the district’s finances are long-term and where cuts could be made to prevent these yearly swings in deficits.
I would also say we’ve seen massive increases in the cost of a lot of our contractual services, including transportation, some of which have gone up nearly 100% over the last five years. So we need to look at those contracts and dig into the details. My job on the school board isn’t necessarily to decide where to cut, but to shine a light on the district’s finances so the public can see the decisions the district is making. For example, the district said it closed a budget gap this year, but a lot of people don’t know how that gap was closed. I don’t think the public is being brought into these yearly financial decisions or understanding their impact on the broader district. So right now it’s to be determined, but we need a lot more oversight of these decisions. That need is very clear from the transformation plan discussions, where the public felt totally blindsided.
Sean: We’re very grateful to welcome Stephanie Johnson, another candidate for the two at-large seats on the Minneapolis Public Schools board. Stephanie, thank you for joining us.
Stephanie: Thanks for having me.
Tane: Stephanie, we’re in the middle of a conversation about changes Minneapolis Public Schools could make to change the status quo and hopefully not end up in the same budget situation it’s been in for the last several years. I’m going to ask all three candidates this, but I’ll start with you. More than half of the district’s buildings are at less than 70% capacity, which by definition is underutilized. Is building underutilization an issue to you? And would consolidation and closures be completely off the table if you were a school board member?
Stephanie: Yes, it is an issue to me, and no, it would not be off the table. I think it has to be part of the conversation. What’s happening within the buildings is that there’s bare-bones staff. I’m an MPS parent, and I’ve seen it in my own student’s school experience. Three years ago, I took a leave of absence from my faculty position to work for MPS, so I experienced it there as well. At the end of the school year — and this will predictably happen again at the end of this school year — there are position cuts. Individual schools in MPS are having to do so much more with less and less each year. That’s the reality in the buildings. It’s not new or unique to MPS, but it’s a problem.
Tane: Michael Baskins, same question. If you were a school board member, would you take building closures or consolidation off the table?
Michael: I think that would be premature. There are certainly a lot of questions about what ideal student experience the district is shooting for. Unfortunately, in the many public meetings I attended, the district wasn’t able to communicate what that ideal experience is, or what resources aren’t available in certain schools that consolidation would allow. That’s pretty shocking, given they said they spent three years on this plan.
Assuming transformation does allow for better resourcing and smaller class sizes, I’ve spoken with many parents who could get on board with some level of consolidation. But there needs to be a very clear, well-thought-out plan, articulated from a place of: this is the district’s long-term strategy for class size and resourcing. That needs to be what the public sees first. Once there’s buy-in on what the future of MPS looks like, then we can talk about how to achieve it. But the order the school board and administration went through in this process, and the lack of detail and, I would say, professionalism in the plan, has left the public disappointed and has lost the administration a lot of trust.
Tane: Christin Crabtree, I want to give you a chance to answer the same question. If you were elected to the school board, would you take school closures or consolidation off the table?
Christin: I think we need to have all options available to us, but I’d like to see us prioritize other things first. Closing schools has a detrimental impact in such far-reaching ways. While I think we need to keep all options open, I’d want to see ongoing projections on the financial and enrollment implications, with the recognition that there are unseen costs when we close schools. That looks like blight in the community, since there are no plans for those empty buildings right now.
We also know that closing a school directly impacts the kids attending it. Oftentimes, it’s a school in a neighborhood that has already been criminally disinvested in. It has implications for test scores, access to higher education, and increased behavior issues. So while closing schools isn’t something I’d completely take off the table, it’s something we need to do with real intentionality and due diligence. It should never be a choice between doing nothing or closing schools. There’s a whole spectrum of other ways for us to move forward as a community.
Tane: So I’m hearing all three of you say, “Don’t take this off the table at this point.” The way this transformation plan was put forward created a potentially bad choice, because it wasn’t presented well. If you’re elected to the school board, how would you make that plan better? Why should families believe there would be better options than what the district came up with over the last several years of planning, if you were on the board helping shape it? Michael Baskins, I’ll start with you this time.
Michael: I think what we have is a bit of a deficit of leadership in the administration. That means they’re not communicating a vision. Leadership means communicating the vision for the district first. What are the metrics that will make this district successful? What do we see as the future of MPS when it comes to class size, resourcing, and building footprint?
The existing school board didn’t give a clear vision for what the transformation plan metrics should look like. They basically gave the administration carte blanche to come up with some ideas. So it’s a leadership deficit that the school board can fix by requiring clear metrics for all the decisions the administration makes. Why are you laying off all these teachers this year? What metric does that align with in your overall vision for the district? Providing that roadmap is important for the school board.
Tane: Stephanie Johnson, I’ll come to you next.
Stephanie: It’s complicated. I would agree with a lot of what Michael said — maybe everything, really. A word that’s tossed around a lot is “instability.” That was part of the big outcry from families and community members about potentially closing schools and realigning within the district. But I think it’s important to understand that the instability is already there. It’s already in the buildings and in the entire school system. Based on my own experience and observations, that’s what contributed to the poor communication and poor rollout of these three options a few weeks ago. What was put forth up front was what would happen, but there was no clarity about what it would result in, as many people have mentioned.
Again, from my own experience working within the district not that long ago, there is a lot of turnover. It’s not just families leaving the district. That’s a piece of it, but it’s at every level: staff, teachers, building leadership, district leadership. These things didn’t happen overnight, or within weeks or even a few years. This has happened over a long period of time, and fixing it, or improving it, will also take a great deal of time.
Tane: Christin Crabtree, this question is for you: Why should families believe the next transformation plan, or whatever it’s called, would be better than the last one if you were on the school board?
Christin: Because they will be part of creating it. We need family voices at the table from the get-go. We should not have a small group of people creating a plan and then trying to sell it to our community. I went to all seven transformation listening sessions, and I heard similar themes at every single one. For example, our dual language task force had met and provided multiple ideas to the district on how to strategically improve and grow the program. It’s a very popular program, and I didn’t see those ideas reflected in the transformation plan very deeply. Another thing that came up was an Afrocentric HBCU pathway. We already have programming in our district we can build on to make that a reality and keep people in our district.
And in all of this conversation, what I’m not hearing are the things that are incredible about Minneapolis Public Schools. Both of my kids are MPS graduates, and I’m proud of the district and the way our community comes together to support our schools. We’ve always known our schools are critical to a healthy neighborhood and a healthy city, but we see that more than ever after the year we just had. We can take those connections and relationships and work together to invest in MPS.
That looks like growing dual language so there’s a Northside pathway. A lot of people on the Northside would love to participate, but once they’re in middle or high school, they have to go all the way to Anderson or Roosevelt, which is really far south. Let’s look at this HBCU idea and work with our Black Parent Advisory Council and our educators to make it a reality, because there’s lots of interest. We also have the opportunity to grow early childhood and pre-K. We know that when kids come into MPS at those young ages, they often stay.
You asked earlier about building utilization. If we know 47% of kids eligible to attend Minneapolis Public Schools aren’t here, how do we bring them in? Some of the best people to do that work are the people in our schools every day. We’ve already seen enrollment grow last year and again this year, so let’s be honest about that. And let’s also be honest that closures do not save money. The point of the plan our administration presented, the way they described it, was making better use of the resources we have, and they explained that it does not save money. What wasn’t talked about are the detrimental impacts of those closures on communities and on our kids. So it’s really important that we address these problems honestly with our community, and that we bring our community along and value them as partners.
Michael: I don’t think we can say it doesn’t save money. They just invested over $10 million in a school with about 100 students that they’re now planning to close. There’s a cost to keeping schools open that are nearly empty, and you’re investing millions and millions of dollars into them every year. There are also obviously going to be savings on administrative costs, which many other districts have seen. So it’s just not true.
Christin: Actually, though, we lose students through attrition when we close schools, and that’s a huge cost. According to the district’s own math, it did not save money. We need honest projections with due diligence. I’m not disagreeing, Michael, that it’s a possibility, but we would need honest projections, and I’m not seeing those come from our district right now. We do know that closures lead people to leave MPS, and that creates a cycle: we have fewer resources, so we have to shrink again, and then we have fewer resources, so we shrink again. What does that do to public education? We need people on this board who are going to be huge advocates for public schools and who will do the work of investing in MPS. We don’t solve disinvestment with disinvestment.
Michael: So are you open to actually voting for a closure?
Christin: I never said that. What I said is I want to see the due diligence and the math before we would ever do that. I think it should be the last option.
Michael: What would the math have to look like for you to vote for a closure?
Christin: It would have to show ongoing projections where we see savings over time, and where we’re not going to lose students, because families were brought along in the decision-making. We need to ensure we keep our kids. We’ve seen a national push toward “right-sizing,” where public schools are losing families because of it. We’re also seeing a wild disinvestment in public education at the state and national level. We can’t control that, but we can control our ability to show up and advocate. And to a point you made earlier that I agree with, we haven’t seen leadership do that in a meaningful way. It’s important that we’re organizing and working across jurisdictions — not just saying, “We’ll go to the Legislature,” but being strategic and working with our city and county governments, because we have shared priorities and our work intersects. So I’m not saying that if closure were the solution, we shouldn’t do it. I’m saying we need the data to show it’s a real solution.
Sean: I want to move us to something I wish we’d already been talking about: actual test results and education outcomes. We’ve been talking a lot about dollars and buildings, but it’s not good news when you look at testing. In 2026, according to the Minnesota Report Card, fewer than 50% of MPS students met standards in math, reading, or science. A recent education scorecard report also shows persistent, large achievement gaps by race and class in the district. What levers does a board member actually have to change those numbers, and how would outcomes for MPS students be different at the end of your first term? I’ll start with Stephanie.
Stephanie: Consolidation of schools and consolidation of resources is the quick answer.
Sean: To improving test results?
Stephanie: Yes. One example the district gave is that a number of schools don’t have reading specialists, reading interventionists, or math interventionists because of budget issues. The district shared that directly: the MPS experience it wants for every student isn’t currently happening, and that’s in large part because resources aren’t the same at all schools.
Sean: Michael Baskins, the same question: What does a board member have available to change those outcomes in the first term?
Michael: Outcomes have dropped since COVID, which we’ve seen across the country. They’ve improved some since then, but not to where they were. My main focus for driving better outcomes is putting resources into the classroom, and when making budget cuts, making sure there’s no impact on students and class sizes. That means support for interventionists and for early childhood literacy, which is a big issue in the district. We have students who fall behind early and then struggle to catch up.
I’d also give principals more autonomy. They know their schools and their populations. But we should hold them accountable for improvement by tracking school-by-school progress year after year across all performance metrics, and making that information public. A big focus of my campaign is transparency in the district, and that’s one of the ways you hold schools accountable. Parents can see how their individual school is doing, and that gives them some ability to hold the school accountable, too.
Sean: Michael, before I move on to Christin: Do you believe consolidation could improve test results, as Stephanie said?
Michael: If consolidation allows for smaller class sizes and better resourcing, I can see how it would benefit student results.
Sean: Christin, first the larger question: What can a board member do to improve educational outcomes and close achievement gaps? And if you can address it, do you believe consolidation could be part of that toolkit.
Christin: Certainly. Our district has already implemented curriculum changes based in the science of reading, which can make an impact. I’ll also say it’s important to understand that a lot of Minneapolis students opt out of standardized testing, so the scores you’re referring to aren’t necessarily statistically significant because of the percentage who opt out. The legislative auditor made a finding saying as much in 2017, and another study this year said the same thing. So it’s really important that we think about the way we talk about our kids, and what messages they hear from the grownups talking about them. Saying things like “kids can’t read” — what does that say to children? Board members need to speak responsibly about the well-being of our community. That means being honest, and it means following data to make sure we’re meeting student needs.
That includes a lot of ideas already mentioned, like making sure reading interventionists are available at all schools. We also need consistency in the curriculum we offer, while recognizing that students are coming from different places. One kindergartner might be starting at first base and another at third base, so measuring growth in their learning is important, not just expecting everyone to be the same.
And MPS is one piece of a large community ecosystem. We should be working with partners like the Youth Coordinating Board, the Planning Commission, and the Park Board to make sure we’re offering life-affirming resources in our communities. Kids can’t learn if they don’t feel safe. There was a lot of work done last year to increase mental health supports in our schools — Zaynab Mohamed led a bill on that, and it didn’t pass — but those are the kinds of things we need. We’re dealing with a community that has experienced a lot of trauma in the last six years. When people talk about stability, that includes making sure school is a safe, affirming place for kids of all identities, and that we’re offering kids the resources they deserve.
I’m not certain consolidation would offer that, but it could, in the sense of making sure each building has enough resources. I also think there are other ways to resource those buildings, like some of what Michael referenced earlier about our outside contracts. What’s increasing, and why? Why do we have the ones we have?
Tane: We’ve talked about this a bit, but Minneapolis Public Schools exists in an ecosystem of school choice and open enrollment, where parents have an abundance of options outside the district. Only about 53% of school-aged children in Minneapolis attend Minneapolis Public Schools right now, down from 60% just a decade ago. Given the district’s current resources, what’s the number one thing the district should do to attract families back? Stephanie Johnson, I’ll start with you.
Stephanie: I’m going to stick with my answer of some level of consolidation, because the resource issue is real when you’re serving the needs of all students. Another example: a lot of positions cut over the last handful of years have been English learner teachers and support staff. You have non-native English speakers immersed in English-speaking classrooms without support because of funding cuts and lack of resources. That impacts everyone’s learning. It also impacts teacher retention, because teachers don’t feel supported when they can’t serve all of their students. This whole conversation, the answer seems to come back to resources — what we don’t have, and being spread too thin across too many buildings at this point.
I’d also say that closing a school doesn’t have to be seen solely as a detriment to the immediate community and families. It can also be an opportunity to maintain a different kind of community hub. A couple things that come to mind, which I’ve shared in other spaces: childcare. Instead of a pre-K-to-graduation pathway, we’d have a birth-to-graduation pathway, starting with families at the beginning. There’s also the potential for a gap-year hub for high school graduates. We talk about “growing our own” all the time. We could bring in current high school students and recent graduates to grow our own educators and community members who are serving our city.
Tane: I appreciate that. Christin Crabtree, same question: What’s the top thing you’d push for to bring families back into Minneapolis Public Schools?
Christin: One of the first things I’d do is the low-hanging fruit of actively partnering with caregivers and educators to work together to bring people back. There have been educators who wanted to go out and do recruitment work and were told no. We have families who are excited and want to do that work, so that’s one of the first things we can do. Every morning, I watch a bus that says Edina Public Schools drive through my neighborhood. So how can I talk to those families and find out what they’re looking for and what they need?
Then we grow the programs we know are popular. We have a roadmap to do that for dual language, for example, a highly popular program. I also love the creative ideas Stephanie brought up around growing our own. I think that’s brilliant. Are there opportunities to work with people advocating for childcare for all to grow that in our schools? Those are great ways to address some of these challenges, and I’m really looking forward to working with the community to keep doing that kind of work.
Tane: Thank you so much. Michael Baskins?
Michael: To echo a lot of what Christin said, we need a clear strategy for recruitment, and that shouldn’t require spending a lot of money. A lot of people are happy to be involved in this effort, as she mentioned. If we’re more creative in how we structure recruitment, we can use community resources and do a lot more of it, more cheaply than people might think.
We also need to be responsive to the parents of any student who leaves the district, and understand their concerns in detail. Those concerns need to be gathered in a way that helps us understand the overall concerns of parents and students. We have a once-a-year survey, and I want to make sure that feedback is properly being turned into a strategy that creates actionable change.
It’s really important that parents trust MPS again. A lot of trust was lost in the way this consolidation plan was rolled out. We need a reset with the administration. They need to be much more transparent about their vision for the district and how they see the next five or 10 years playing out. I would force that conversation and push the administration to create a plan that can build long-term trust, so parents who aren’t currently in the district will bring their students back.
Sean: This has been a very fruitful conversation, and it’s given us an opportunity to understand a lot more about the issues. Thank you to everyone for joining us, sharing your views, and engaging with one another. I know we had long answers, but frankly, sometimes that’s more valuable than bullet points on more questions. Stephanie Johnson, Christin Crabtree, and Michael Baskins, all candidates for the two at-large seats on the Minneapolis Public Schools board: We appreciate your time, and thank you so much for joining us on City Cast Twin Cities.
Michael: Thank you.
Christin: Thank you.
_________
Responses from Collin Beachy:
Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts, and I’m sorry I couldn’t join you tonight.
It’s been an honor to serve on the Minneapolis School Board, including the past several years in Board leadership. As both a longtime special education teacher and Board Chair, I bring a perspective shaped by what happens in our classrooms and the responsibility of governing an entire district.
I know we face significant challenges, but I also know the tremendous strengths of our students, educators, and school communities.
I’m running for reelection because I believe in what Minneapolis Public Schools can become: a stronger, more sustainable destination district where every student has the opportunity to succeed.
The district is no longer proposing to close up to 16 schools. By simple yes or no, would you have voted for any of the three proposals?
I was not prepared to vote yes on any of the three proposals as presented. However, I believe there are elements within those proposals that deserve serious consideration and areas where we can find common ground.
The proposals were developed in response to real challenges facing our district, and the work that went into them should not be discarded. We have gathered important data, identified opportunities, and heard significant feedback from our community.
For me, the question now is how we build on that work, incorporate what we’ve learned, and move forward in a way that strengthens the student experience while ensuring the long-term sustainability of Minneapolis Public Schools.
MPS has had to close budget gaps three years running ranging from $40 million to $110 million. What’s the first thing you’d push for in the 2027-28 budget?
My first priority is ensuring that our budget reflects what we say matters most: student learning and the supports necessary for students to succeed.
Over the past several years, we’ve confronted significant financial challenges, but we’ve also taken meaningful steps to strengthen financial accountability. When serious financial management and reporting issues were identified, the Board demanded answers, supported corrective action plans, and established expectations for measurable progress. Working with our Superintendent and administration, we’ve taken steps to correct longstanding problems, improve financial oversight, and recover millions of dollars in funding.
That work demonstrates accountability in action. It’s not simply about identifying what went wrong, but making sure we correct it and put systems in place to prevent it from happening again.
As we approach the 2027–28 budget, I want us to continue directing resources toward strong classroom instruction, academic interventions, special education, and student support services. At the same time, we must address the underlying structural costs that continue to put pressure on our classrooms.
A sustainable budget isn’t simply about balancing numbers. It’s about ensuring we can deliver a consistent, high-quality education to students today and in the years ahead.
More than half of the district’s buildings are underutilized, meaning they’re at less than 70% capacity. Is building underutilization an issue to you? Are school consolidation and closures off the table completely? If so, what are the other realistic options?
Yes, building underutilization is a serious issue, and I do not believe we can responsibly take consolidation completely off the table.
When we operate buildings significantly below capacity, we are spending resources on facilities that could otherwise support students and classrooms. But I also recognize that schools are important parts of our neighborhoods, and any changes must be thoughtful and informed by the communities they affect.
I believe there are opportunities to explore shared facilities, partnerships with the city and Park Board, community hubs, building repurposing, and potentially phased approaches to implementation.
There are also elements of the transformation proposals that could help us address these challenges. Rather than starting over, I believe we should identify where there is agreement, determine what needs further work, and develop a path forward.
Ultimately, the goal isn’t simply to operate fewer buildings. It’s to create a stronger, more sustainable school system that delivers a better experience for every student.
According to data from the Minnesota Report Card, in 2026, the percentage of MPS students meeting standards for math, reading, or science was less than 50%. The results of a recent Education Scorecard report also show persistent and large achievement gaps between race and class in the district. What lever does a board member actually have to change those numbers and how would outcomes for MPS students be different at the end of your first term?
As a special education teacher for more than 20 years, I understand that improving academic outcomes requires sustained effort, consistency, and accountability.
The Board’s role is to establish clear expectations, allocate resources, monitor progress, and hold the Superintendent accountable for results. We do not direct classroom instruction, but we have a responsibility to ensure that the systems supporting teaching and learning are effective.
One area I’ve consistently emphasized is looking at student growth alongside proficiency. We need to know not only how many students are meeting standards, but whether students are making meaningful progress throughout the year.
We’ve made important investments in literacy instruction and evidence-based practices, but significant achievement gaps remain. We need to continue that work, strengthen academic interventions, and ensure that students have access to the supports they need regardless of which school they attend.
Success at the end of my next term would mean measurable improvements in academic growth and proficiency, narrowing achievement gaps, and greater consistency in the educational experience across our district.
School choice and open enrollment means parents have an abundance of options outside of public school. Only about 53% of school-aged children in Minneapolis attend an MPS school, which is down from more than 60% just a decade ago. Given current district resources, what can realistically do to attract new families to the district?
I believe our strongest enrollment strategy is creating schools that families trust and students want to attend.
Over the past few years, the Board has worked with district leadership to develop a more intentional and comprehensive enrollment strategy. This includes focusing on attracting families through early childhood education and kindergarten, while also addressing student retention during the critical transitions from elementary to middle school and from middle to high school.
We also need to do a better job sharing the many successes happening throughout Minneapolis Public Schools. We have extraordinary students, dedicated educators, and outstanding programs, but too often those stories get lost.
At the same time, families need consistency. They need confidence that their children will receive a high-quality education, strong academic programming, and appropriate support services regardless of which MPS school they choose.
That’s what I mean when I talk about making MPS a destination district. It’s about building a coherent, sustainable school system that families trust, and one they’re proud to choose.
Enrollment growth is not just about attracting new families. It’s also about giving the families already with us every reason to stay.
Over the past four years, we’ve confronted difficult challenges, made meaningful progress, and learned important lessons. There is still much work ahead, but I believe we have an opportunity to build on that work rather than start over.
Leadership isn’t about having all the answers. It’s about listening, being accountable, working together, and having the courage to make difficult decisions when necessary.
I remain committed to building a coherent, sustainable public school system where every student has access to a consistent, high-quality education, regardless of which school they attend.
I believe in our students, our educators, and the future of Minneapolis Public Schools. I’d be honored to earn your vote and continue this work. Thank you.
