Below is a policy proposal I submitted for consideration under District Policy 208. Any community member may suggest a policy change through this process; however, proposals should be carefully researched, thoughtfully written, and supported by relevant laws, district information, and, if possible, examples from other school districts.

This review was originally requested by a community member who contacted me with concerns about race-based provisions in Policy 466, Professional Development and Mentoring.

Professional Development and Mentoring

Submitted under District Policy 208

To: Superintendent Peterson and Members of the Mankato Area Public Schools Policy Committee
From: Elizabeth Hanke
Re: Proposed review and amendment of District Policy 466

Pursuant to District Policy 208, Sections III.C and IV.A, I am submitting the following proposal to review and amend District Policy 466, Professional Development and Mentoring.

Background

I received a constituent concern regarding a March 9, 2026, report published by Defending Education. The report identified Mankato Area Public Schools as one of several Minnesota school districts whose professional-development policies contain provisions authorizing race-specific financial incentives, affinity groups, mentoring programs, or other employment-related support.

Before my election to the School Board, I spoke during public comment when provisions allowing race-based differentiation in staff development, mentoring, and related incentives were under consideration. I advocated for policies that support all educators and students equally, without regard to race or ethnicity.

My position then, as now, is that professional opportunities, stipends, mentoring, and retention support should be based on objective, job-related criteria available to all similarly situated employees. The concerns I raised at that time remain relevant to the current language in Policy 466, Section V.D.

Current Language in Policy 466

MAPS Policy 466, Section V.D, currently provides that district funds—including staff-development revenue or “another funding source”—may be used for:

1. Additional stipends as incentives to mentors of color or mentors who are American Indian;
2. Financial support for professional learning community affinity groups for teachers from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups;
3. Induction programs aligned with the mentorship program, especially for teachers from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups; and
4. Grants supporting professional development related to increasing achievement among students of color and American Indian students.

This language is similar to provisions found in Minnesota Statutes § 122A.70 and related sections. However, federal Title VII prohibits race discrimination in compensation and in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment—including access to employer training programs. The Minnesota Human Rights Act contains parallel protections.

Requested Review and Action

I request that the administration:

1. Obtain a written legal opinion addressing whether each provision of Policy 466, Section V.D, complies with:
   • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act;
   • The Equal Protection Clause;
   • The Minnesota Human Rights Act;
   • Minnesota Statutes §§ 122A.70, 124D.861, and 124D.862; and
   • Any applicable conditions attached to state or federal grants.
2. Provide the Board with an operational report identifying:
   • Whether the district has implemented any of the provisions in Section V.D;
   • The funding sources and amounts spent on each initiative;
   • The eligibility requirements used;
   • Whether stipends, grants, leave protections, placements, or professional-development opportunities have differed according to an employee’s race or ethnicity; and
   • Whether the district currently receives any grants requiring these provisions.
3. Return Policy 466 to the School Board for a first reading after the legal and operational reviews have been completed.
4. Replace race-based employee eligibility criteria with objective, job-related criteria, except when a specific grant legally requires narrower eligibility and district legal counsel confirms that the grant can be implemented consistently with applicable law.

Proposed Replacement for Section V.D

I propose replacing the current Section V.D in its entirety with the following:

D. Mentoring, Professional-Development, and Retention Initiatives

The school district may use staff-development revenue, special grant funds established by the Legislature, or another lawful funding source to provide mentor stipends and support mentorship, induction, professional learning communities, professional development, and employee-retention initiatives.

Eligibility, participation, compensation, and other employment benefits provided under this section shall be determined through objective and job-related criteria, including professional experience, years of service, license-shortage areas, identified professional needs, mentoring responsibilities, and documented district staffing needs.

Except when expressly required by a specific law or restricted grant—and determined by district legal counsel to comply with applicable federal and state law—no employee shall receive or be denied compensation, professional-development opportunities, training, mentoring, leave protection, placement, or another employment benefit because of the employee’s race, color, ethnicity, or national origin.

Nothing in this section prevents the district from offering professional development designed to help staff improve achievement and educational opportunities for student populations identified through district data, provided that employee access to such professional development is administered consistently with applicable nondiscrimination laws.

Before accepting or implementing a grant containing race-conscious employee eligibility requirements, the administration shall inform the School Board of the program’s requirements, funding amount, duration, and legal basis.

The current provisions in Section V.D—and any related race-specific retention or placement language—would be deleted and replaced with the language above.

Why I Am Proposing This Approach

This proposal would allow the district to:

• Obtain clear legal guidance;
• Understand how the current policy has been implemented and funded;
• Continue offering strong mentoring and professional-development programs; and
• Base employee eligibility and benefits on objective criteria available to all similarly situated employees.

Hastings Public Schools’ Policy 425 provides a potentially useful model. It retains the authority to provide mentor stipends without including the same race-specific provisions.

If the Board ultimately amends Policy 466 to remove the race-based language, a logical follow-up would be to notify Defending Education of the change and request that the district be removed from its documentation.

Formal Request

I respectfully request that the superintendent review this proposal pursuant to Policy 208 and that it be placed on a future School Board agenda for discussion and action.

I am available to provide additional information or discuss this matter further.

Thank you for your service to the Mankato community.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Hanke
Mankato, Minnesota
507-351-3367

Attachment: Hastings Public Schools Policy 425