The Robbinsdale School District’s proposal to close five schools represents a profound failure of leadership and fiscal management that unfairly punishes students and families for administrative incompetence. What’s particularly troubling is how quickly district officials have pivoted to school closures rather than exploring less disruptive alternatives that preserve educational communities. The $21 million deficit, exacerbated by an accounting error, reveals systemic problems that closing schools won’t fix.
Parents are right to be outraged. When Superintendent Dr. Teri Staloch frames school closures as part of her vision to “Reimagine R-Dale,” she’s using aspirational language to mask a crisis response. This isn’t reimagining—it’s downsizing disguised as innovation.
Administrative Failures Shouldn’t Be Solved on Children’s Backs
The district’s financial crisis stems primarily from leadership failures, not from the actions of students, teachers, or parents. An accounting error that significantly contributed to the deficit represents a fundamental breakdown in fiscal oversight. The high leadership turnover mentioned in the article further suggests organizational dysfunction at the administrative level.
Similar scenarios have played out in districts nationwide. In Chicago Public Schools, a 2013 wave of school closures was presented as necessary budget balancing, but a University of Chicago study later revealed the closures saved only a fraction of the projected costs while significantly disrupting student learning. The promised academic benefits never materialized.
Rather than immediately closing schools, Robbinsdale should conduct a forensic audit of administrative spending, implement stronger financial controls, and potentially reduce top-heavy administrative positions before targeting educational facilities. When the Philadelphia School District faced similar challenges in 2019, they first implemented a 10% reduction in central office staff, saving millions before considering any school closures.
The Hidden Costs of School Closures
School closures create costs that don’t appear on balance sheets. As one parent eloquently stated, “When you close a school, you don’t just close a building, you disrupt relationships, fracture trust and dismantle ecosystems.” These ecosystems include teacher-student relationships that research consistently shows are crucial for academic success, particularly for vulnerable students.
The disruption extends beyond academic impacts. Schools serve as community anchors, providing stability and continuity for neighborhoods. When Seattle closed schools in 2009, researchers documented increased family mobility, neighborhood destabilization, and declining property values in affected areas—ultimately undermining the tax base needed for future school funding.
Transportation costs often rise after closures as students travel farther to remaining schools. In West Virginia, where rural school consolidation was aggressively pursued as a cost-saving measure, transportation costs increased by 30% within five years, erasing much of the projected savings.
Equity Concerns Cannot Be Dismissed
The parent who noted that the proposal “places the greatest harm on students with the least power” raises a critical point about equity. School closures disproportionately impact low-income communities and students of color, who often have fewer resources to adapt to such disruptions.
Research from the University of California-Berkeley found that students displaced by school closures typically experience a 3-6 month academic setback. For students already facing achievement gaps, this additional setback can have compounding effects throughout their educational careers.
The district must provide detailed equity impact assessments for each proposed closure, including analysis of which demographic groups will be most affected and what specific supports will be provided to mitigate harm. Without such transparency, claims about reimagining education ring hollow.
Alternative Approaches Deserve Consideration
While the district has reportedly considered measures like downsizing transportation and increasing class sizes, more creative solutions deserve exploration before resorting to closures. Facility sharing with community organizations, public-private partnerships for building maintenance, and energy efficiency upgrades could reduce costs while preserving educational spaces.
The Oakland Unified School District in California implemented a successful shared-use program that generated revenue by leasing underutilized school spaces to compatible community organizations during non-school hours. This approach preserved neighborhood schools while creating new funding streams.
Temporary consolidation—where buildings remain open but share administration—could achieve some cost savings while giving the district time to address its structural financial issues. This approach would preserve the option to fully restore schools when finances improve.
Alternative Viewpoints
Advocates for closure argue that maintaining underutilized buildings diverts resources from educational programs. They contend that consolidating into fewer buildings could allow for more specialized programs and services concentrated in remaining schools. This perspective has merit if—and only if—the district can demonstrate that savings will be redirected to classroom resources rather than administrative overhead.
Some might also argue that declining enrollment makes right-sizing inevitable. However, this argument assumes enrollment trends are permanent rather than cyclical. Districts that hastily closed schools during previous enrollment dips have sometimes found themselves facing capacity shortages when demographic trends reversed, forcing expensive new construction.
A Path Forward That Prioritizes Students
The Robbinsdale School Board should pause its closure plans and implement a more transparent, deliberative process. The January 2026 deadline for submitting a corrective financial plan to the Minnesota Department of Education provides adequate time for developing solutions that don’t sacrifice educational communities.
The board should commission an independent analysis of the accounting errors that led to this crisis and implement reforms to prevent recurrence. Administrative spending should be scrutinized before classroom resources. Most importantly, any consolidation plan should be phased, reversible, and developed with meaningful community input—not just performative listening sessions.
The current crisis presents an opportunity for Robbinsdale to develop a model for fiscally responsible education that doesn’t sacrifice community schools. This would truly be “reimagining” education, rather than simply cutting it.
