2026 Operational Referendum

Actionable efforts to reduce spending include:

• Reduced middle/high school administration from two positions to one
• Left a district office position unfilled and absorbed duties
• Reduced classroom staffing positions by four full-time positions
• Adjusted insurance plans to manage cost increases
• Partnered with neighboring districts to share services
•  Delayed non-essential building maintenance
• Extended the replacement cycle for technology devices

While no financial decisions have been made at this time, the District would be forced to consider the following:

• Increase class sizes by reducing staff
• Reduce student support programs
• Reduce course offerings and options
• Defer maintenance and technology work
• Compensation and benefits would fall behind for our region
• Need to short-term borrow funds which increase interest costs
• Deplete fund balance (empty our savings account)

No. The district has clean audits and strong financial oversight. Schools across Wisconsin are facing funding challenges, and many have used operational referendums to maintain programs and services.

No. Operational referendums are common in Wisconsin. Over the past 10 years, nearly 80% of districts have sought one, and more than half have been approved by voters. Many nearby districts rely on referendum funding to support their operations.

Special education is required by law but is not fully funded by the state. The district receives reimbursement for only part of these costs and must cover the rest from its general budget. This reduces funding available for other programs, staffing, facilities, and student services.

• Expiration of the current operational referendum
• Rising costs due to inflation
• Inadequate state & federal funding
• Increase in required services for students
• Decline in school-aged population

It’s a Limit, Not a Check: The $325 per-pupil increase is the maximum ceiling a district can increase its revenue, not guaranteed cash from the state.

The Funding Shift: If state aid doesn’t increase (as the 25-27 biennial budget calls for), the $325 increase in revenue limit forces the difference to be made up through higher local property taxes.

Inflation & Costs: This increase is insufficient to keep up with inflation, rising operational costs, and declining enrollment, so it requires districts to continue to make cuts and/or ask for more via referendum.

Calculation Method: Revenue limits are based on a three-year rolling average of student enrollment (third Friday in September + 40% of summer school FTE).

Context: While the 400-year veto ensures this adjustment, it does not guarantee the state will provide the money, often making the local property tax levy the primary source.

In summary, the $325 is authorized spending authority, not a direct state payment.