DECISION 2022

In an effort to keep you, our readers, well-informed and abreast of relevant issues, today is the 11th in a series of questions we are asking all of Steele County’s candidates for state office.

We want voters to know where each candidate stands on the issues in order to make their best decision at the ballot box.

Each week, we’ll ask the candidates a new question. They will all receive the same question, be given a word limit and a deadline of four days to answer. We’ll publish their answers the following Wednesday; responses may be edited for length.

The series will continue through Nov. 2, the last Wednesday before the Nov. 8 general election.

If a candidate doesn’t respond, we’ll note that.

This week, we’re asking about funding K-12 education:

Classes are back in session throughout the state – the first “real” school year since 2018-19. In a classic example of not doing their own homework, legislators went home in May without passing a bill that would help fund education in the state, even working with a record-breaking $9.2 billion budget surplus. It’s presumed the Minnesota Legislature will take another crack at it this session.

What do you consider non-negotiable in an education bill; that is, what must or must not be included in order for you to vote in favor of a new bill?

The limit was 250 words.

We advise you to ignore the R or DFL behind each name and reflect only on the answers. You might be surprised to find more common ground than you expected. An (i) indicates the incumbent candidate, though with this spring’s redistricting, the district numbers may not align with the seat they’re seeking.

Question 11: What do you consider non-negotiable in an education bill; that is, what must or must not be included in order for you to vote in favor of a new bill?  (250 words)

Minnesota House District 19B

Abdulahi Ali Osman – DFL, of Owatonna: My utmost priority for this campaign is education. I think it is unacceptable that legislators went home without passing a bill, specifically dealing with education. My biggest concern is coming from one major issue, which is Minnesota’s low-ranking achievement gap. Among the factors that contribute to this status is the lack of high-quality early education, including full government-paid pre-k and kindergarten and funding disparity. I would work very hard to introduce bills that provide free and high-quality early education and equity in funding for all Minnesota children, specifically for southern Minnesota. 

John Petersburg – R (i-24A), of Waseca: Did not respond.

Minnesota House District 23A

Peggy Bennett – R (i-27A), of Albert Lea: I approach all legislation with an open mind. I will not start session saying certain things must or must not be included for my vote. No one should start with a mindset like that. That’s not how we solve problems.

Minnesota schools have been flooded with additional funding over the past two years. Our schools received a hefty HALF BILLION dollar increase in the 2021 regular two-year budget as well as an additional $2.7 BILLION in pandemic relief funding from the federal government. Much of that federal funding schools were given remains unspent. Did you know there is no evidence that putting more money into education increases student performance? Data shows that, while Minnesota education funding has increased exponentially over the last 20-30 years, student performance has drastically declined. Currently, only 45% of Minnesota students are proficient in math and 51% in reading. This tells me that money will not fix the problem. Our education system needs significant and innovative reform.

Here are some educational priorities I am working on: Return the focus of education to equipping students with basic foundations like reading, writing, and math – not on pushing controversial political propaganda into classrooms; reduce paperwork and mandates for teachers and schools so teachers have more time to teach; encourage strong partnership bonds between parents and teachers; and innovate and diversify educational opportunity to better meet student and family needs – including more educational alternatives for students and more local control for public schools to innovate and meet student needs.

Mary Hinnenkamp – DFL, of Albert Lea: I am a strong believer in public education and will fight any efforts to defund it. Public education is a great equalizer in our society and the best hope for our future. For many years, I was the Director of the Albert Lea Area Learning Center, a program for kids who had struggles in school, got behind in credits and were losing hope. I met with them and their parents to register at the ALC, make a plan to get caught up and earn their diploma. Over my years, 750 students earned that diploma and went on to further education and jobs. Many of the students’ families had struggles of their own. Some of the parents had not graduated, so this diploma was a significant milestone and huge step forward.

I believe that we need to fully fund public education, pay for special education and English Language education. We need to ensure that class sizes are small, that there are paras in the classroom to provide extra help, and that there are mental health and social workers available to students. Research indicates that most brain development occurs in the first five years of students’ lives, so we need to invest in Pre-K education so that our youngest learners begin kindergarten ready to learn. I oppose any efforts to defund public education by using public money to pay for private school tuition. I oppose any efforts to cut education funding to give a tax break to the wealthy.

Minnesota House District 23B

Patricia Mueller – R (i-27B), of Austin: As a teacher for almost 20 years, I know that education is a priority for families and vital for a strong society. Parents want their children to have a rigorous and appropriate education that will prepare them for the demands of the future. This requires funding and choice. 

First, education funding is complex and often seems to favor metro schools. During my first term in office, I witnessed how funding was often stipulated on certain programs or initiatives. Rather than the state mandating how money should be spent by all school districts, funds should be directed to school districts so they can target their local needs. Special education also needs to be more appropriately funded while also analyzing cost drivers and streamlining paperwork.

Second, we know that students learn differently and have different needs. This means families need choices. Education choice is more than allowing parents to choose the best school for their students. It means providing more pathways to graduation – apprenticeships, on-the-job training, and class electives. Businesses often share how they would be excited to mentor or train students who are interested in various fields. Allowing authentic experiences that count towards high school and college credit not only provides individualization but also lowers college tuition.

Legislators need to understand the complexities of education and prevent writing policies or mandates that have unintended consequences. As an experienced educator, I know how important it is to provide balanced and accountable funding along with more flexibility and choice for our students.

Tom Stiehm – DFL, of Austin: I believe any school bill must address mental health of our students, without barriers or stigma to the students. We have to learn to identify mental health issues in students so their needs can be addressed early.

Minnesota should provide funding for students from pre-K through the first year of community college. We should provide funding for pre-K so that young students are ready for kindergarten. I would oppose private school funding thru vouchers.

Minnesota Senate District 19

Kate Falvey – DFL, of Faribault: As someone who is starting their 17th year in education, has a graduate degree in teaching, and has worked as a teacher in a state other than Minnesota, I think it may be difficult to do this answer in 250 words or less, but I will give it my best shot.

I have read the side-by-side comparison of the House, Senate, and Governor’s proposals for education spending that would have been taken from the $9 billion surplus. After reading the comparison, I have to say that I would make changes to all three of them, including the House’s proposal of $1.2 billion dollars – which is almost twice what the Governor wanted and four times what the Republican-controlled Senate proposed. However, this week’s question is about deal-breakers, so I won’t bore everyone with details about comparisons.

What must be INCLUDED: A raise in pay and full benefits for ESPs; funding for more mental health professionals and social workers in the schools; financial incentives for teachers or those considering education to work in high-need geographical areas or subject-area shortages; more truancy prevention support and addressing chronic truancy — especially in middle school; fully-funded Early Childhood and Pre-K programs starting at age 3.

What must NEVER be included: Restrictions on books in school libraries or classrooms based on personal or one group’s specific beliefs; “silencing” provisions placed on educators for supporting BIPOC & LGBTQ+ students; giving public money to private or parochial schools or homeschooled students and giving out vouchers for attending those schools

John Jasinksi – R (i-24), of Faribault: There are two main topics that I feel are non-negotiable. The first is we need to invest in proven programs to improve literacy and math skills with a core focus on helping students thrive academically. Studies have shown that almost half of our Minnesota students are not reading at grade level. This can create a domino effect on our children, with many students acting out and having mental health issues because they feel inferior to other students. By improving our children’s literacy, we can help make our children successful and continue to improve our workforce across Minnesota into the future. 

Secondly, we need to block burdensome new mandates from the state. This causes many issues at the local school district level with unfunded mandates that effect our local school district budgets. I feel it is important to let our local school boards make choices about what they feel is best for our students on a district by district plan. 

Last session, the Senate Republicans made these our priorities and we will continue to fight for them next session as well.

Minnesota Senate District 23

Gene Dornink – R (i-27), of Brownsdale: For years our students’ performance and test scores have been declining and with COVID restrictions and distance learning, our children's education has gotten off on the wrong track. Children, parents, and educators have been put in challenging situations they had never experienced. We learned that Governor Walz’s school shutdowns had a devasting impact on our children’s education. We need to invest in our teachers and use proven strategies to improve literacy and math education. 

Our children deserve a quality education, and that starts by investing in our classrooms with innovative strategies that work. Currently, only 48% of Minnesota third graders can read at grade level. We don't need new laws or unfunded government mandates. We need to focus on what works and parents need to be a part of their child’s education.

I want to thank educators and staff for continuing to mold the next generation and their commitment to our kids through a difficult time. We appreciate all your hard work and dedication, especially over the last few years.  If I can ever be assistance, please don’t hesitate to reach out, you can send me an email at sen.gene.dornink@senate.mn

Brandon Lawhead – DFL, of Austin: Public education is the most necessary investment for a capitalist society. It would be my first priority. I have been endorsed by Education Minnesota. I would respectfully request, the following:

Increased teacher pay; full funding for early childhood education, and expanded access to pre-K educational opportunities; funding for extra-curricular activities, including sports, music, and the arts; greater institutional flexibility to forge public-private partnerships.

Next week’s question:

There are more than enough political differences of opinion to go around, even between members of the same party – some would say now more than ever. Why can’t we all just get along for the good of the city, state, country, and so on? The short answer is because we’re all individuals, but that doesn’t mean we can’t work at it.

What forms of political argument or support do you feel are effective, productive, or encourage you to think and learn from those with whom you disagree?