MONROE - School board members informally agreed Monday to ask voters for a three-year $1.5 million referendum during the November election, a compromise they said should help its chances of passing and still temporarily allow the district to avoid further cuts through deficit spending.
"In the first year, it ($1.5 million) actually might - it might cover us pretty well. It might allow us to build some fund balance back," said Bob Erb, president. "In the meantime, I think ... you can't cut your way to excellence. We have to continue to try to build and, again, get our story out, get the community more engaged and involved and understand that what we're doing has tremendous value."
Business Administrator Ron Olson estimated the district would need $1.8 million per year to maintain current school programming and services, but a recent survey found voters' support lacking for a $1.8 million referendum. Bill Foster of School Perceptions, the firm that conducted the survey, suggested at a previous meeting the district ask for less to increase the chances of the measure passing.
According to Olson's projections, a $1.5 million referendum could mean cutting between three and five teaching positions or six to seven support staff positions or three administrative positions. If a referendum fails, the district would have to cut as many as 28 teaching positions.
But some board members said they weren't willing to commit to cuts to staff or services. Rich Deprez said he would support $1.5 million if, instead of cuts, the district operates as if it went with $1.8 million. That would mean growing the deficit to make up the shortfall.
The district's deficit has been hovering around $1 million for the past few years, though Olson said it dipped below $400,000 last school year. He said he will continue to look for and make reductions "when it makes sense."
Increasing the deficit wouldn't be much different than what the district is already doing, Erb said.
Keith said if the lower referendum question passes, it will allow the district to operate for three more years, after which most of its debt will retire and make another referendum easier on the taxpayers.
And another referendum is all but inevitable, according to board members.
"Unless the state has decided to completely reinvent how they're doing school funding, we're going to be out here having this conversation again," Erb said.
Members Dan Bartholf and Les Bieneman both advocated for asking for the full $1.8 million per year but conceded to the smaller figure after Deprez suggested deficit spending rather than cuts.
Bartholf argued November is the district's best chance at passing a referendum because of the high voter turnout expected for the presidential election. The district has been making cuts for the past 10 years and operating with the same budget as 10 years ago, he said.
"We can't keep cutting and expect a positive school district," Bartholf said. "We start acknowledging that we're going to be cutting, teachers are going to be leaving, people are going to be pulling students. Providing less services, this is not how we get more kids to come to our school."
A recurring concern at school board meetings has been the increase in students leaving the district, which reduces its funding.
The first school referendum question on the ballot will ask voters to approve $1.5 million for three years to maintain current programming and services, Olson said. The second question will ask for $460,000 per year for three years for safety and maintenance projects.
Olson emphasized that a referendum does not increase the district's spending.
If a majority of voters vote "yes" on both questions in November, the district would be able to levy almost $2 million in taxes above its state-set limit for each of the next three years. Olson estimated that would raise school-related property taxes by $1.89 per $1,000 of property value, which is an increase of about $190 for a $100,000 house.
Olson said in an email he plans to have the official resolution ready for the board to vote on at the Aug. 8 meeting.
Mary Berger, the board's vice president, wasn't present at the meeting but participated over speakerphone.
"In the first year, it ($1.5 million) actually might - it might cover us pretty well. It might allow us to build some fund balance back," said Bob Erb, president. "In the meantime, I think ... you can't cut your way to excellence. We have to continue to try to build and, again, get our story out, get the community more engaged and involved and understand that what we're doing has tremendous value."
Business Administrator Ron Olson estimated the district would need $1.8 million per year to maintain current school programming and services, but a recent survey found voters' support lacking for a $1.8 million referendum. Bill Foster of School Perceptions, the firm that conducted the survey, suggested at a previous meeting the district ask for less to increase the chances of the measure passing.
According to Olson's projections, a $1.5 million referendum could mean cutting between three and five teaching positions or six to seven support staff positions or three administrative positions. If a referendum fails, the district would have to cut as many as 28 teaching positions.
But some board members said they weren't willing to commit to cuts to staff or services. Rich Deprez said he would support $1.5 million if, instead of cuts, the district operates as if it went with $1.8 million. That would mean growing the deficit to make up the shortfall.
The district's deficit has been hovering around $1 million for the past few years, though Olson said it dipped below $400,000 last school year. He said he will continue to look for and make reductions "when it makes sense."
Increasing the deficit wouldn't be much different than what the district is already doing, Erb said.
Keith said if the lower referendum question passes, it will allow the district to operate for three more years, after which most of its debt will retire and make another referendum easier on the taxpayers.
And another referendum is all but inevitable, according to board members.
"Unless the state has decided to completely reinvent how they're doing school funding, we're going to be out here having this conversation again," Erb said.
Members Dan Bartholf and Les Bieneman both advocated for asking for the full $1.8 million per year but conceded to the smaller figure after Deprez suggested deficit spending rather than cuts.
Bartholf argued November is the district's best chance at passing a referendum because of the high voter turnout expected for the presidential election. The district has been making cuts for the past 10 years and operating with the same budget as 10 years ago, he said.
"We can't keep cutting and expect a positive school district," Bartholf said. "We start acknowledging that we're going to be cutting, teachers are going to be leaving, people are going to be pulling students. Providing less services, this is not how we get more kids to come to our school."
A recurring concern at school board meetings has been the increase in students leaving the district, which reduces its funding.
The first school referendum question on the ballot will ask voters to approve $1.5 million for three years to maintain current programming and services, Olson said. The second question will ask for $460,000 per year for three years for safety and maintenance projects.
Olson emphasized that a referendum does not increase the district's spending.
If a majority of voters vote "yes" on both questions in November, the district would be able to levy almost $2 million in taxes above its state-set limit for each of the next three years. Olson estimated that would raise school-related property taxes by $1.89 per $1,000 of property value, which is an increase of about $190 for a $100,000 house.
Olson said in an email he plans to have the official resolution ready for the board to vote on at the Aug. 8 meeting.
Mary Berger, the board's vice president, wasn't present at the meeting but participated over speakerphone.