Necedah Schools

A: Unfortunately, the Long-Term Strategy of State-Level Taxpayer Advocacy will take time. In the short-term, the district is asking for community support one more time. The primary reason for the referendum is due to a state policy issue in how Wisconsin funds its schools. Specifically, there are two major funding gaps. These gaps are not a Necedah-issue, but a statewide issue. 

A: Without these operational funds, the district faces a state funding deficit. To meet federal mandates for special education without the necessary revenue, and to offset increases in operating costs without an inflationary increase in revenue, we would be forced to make significant cuts to elective courses, extracurricular activities, and staff. As a result, reductions would be made to elective courses (such as woods, foods, metals, business, etc.), intervention services (extra support for students who are performing below grade level in reading and math) staffing (higher class sizes) and student activities (field trips, off-campus experiences, community projects, etc.) A referendum ensures that we can continue to offer a comprehensive curriculum, maintain our commitment to meeting the individual needs of every student, maintain small class sizes, and address safety concerns faced by students, staff and families.

In 2017, an operational referendum failed, resulting in program reductions in business education and family and consumer education at the high school level. While the district has attempted to address these reductions by offering limited alternative experiences, it has not been able to fully restore these programs as comprehensive options for students.

A: For 17 years, the state legislature has not provided an inflationary increase in the revenue limit (the cap on how much a district can spend). During a period when inflation rose by 34%, our state-authorized revenue increased by only 17% (which includes the current operational referendum/$950,000). The renewal of the current operational referendum will allow our local community to bridge this gap in state funding, ensuring we can maintain basic services and programming that the state budget fails to cover, or until state-level taxpayer advocacy forces a new funding policy. If state funding policy would have kept up with annual inflationary increases, Necedah would have an additional $2.3 million in our budget, and would not need to burden local taxpayers. 

A: Operational funding supports the day-to-day expenses required to operate the school district and ensure a safe, effective learning environment. These funds are used for general operating costs, including but not limited to:

• Utilities (electricity, heating, water, internet)
• Transportation and fuel
• Salaries and benefits for staff
• Instructional materials and classroom supplies
• Building maintenance, repairs, and custodial services
• Technology systems and support
• Food service operations
• Insurance and professional services
• Student Safety

Operational funding ensures schools function efficiently, remain safe, and provide consistent, high-quality educational services to students.

A: Inflationary increases have outweighed the annual revenue limit increases for the past 18 years. Necedah Area School District, not unlike other schools, has faced ongoing inflationary pressures that drive up operating costs each year. Expenses such as health insurance, utilities, transportation, special education services, instructional materials, and facility maintenance often increase faster than available revenues. Staffing costs are also impacted by inflation through wage pressures, benefit costs, and the need to remain competitive in attracting and retaining qualified educators and support staff. Because many of these costs are fixed or mandated, schools have limited flexibility to absorb inflation without impacting programs or services. For the past decade, Necedah has continually balanced rising costs with the goal of maintaining high-quality educational opportunities and safe learning environments for students.

A: Yes, there was a modest increase in the revenue limit, that again fell below inflation for the 17th straight year. The increase was not paired with increased state aid, so the small increase shifted all the responsibility on local taxpayers.

A: No. School districts can only spend what the state-imposed revenue limit is on any given year, and the increase in revenue for 25-26 was less than the inflationary increase. Revenue limit increases have been less than inflation for over 17 years.

A: Referendum is the only way a school district can address the funding gap created when state funding does not keep pace with mandated costs and authorized spending authority. With general inflationary increases, and revenue that is less than inflation, the school district must cut programs and services or seek referendum approval. In the case of Necedah, we are doing both.  

A: By law, we must provide specific services for students with disabilities (IEP requirements), yet the state only reimburses approximately 38% of those costs. In the 2024-25 school year alone, Necedah had to transfer $1.4 million from the general operating budget to cover these unfunded legal obligations. This means $1.4 million was diverted from the general operational budget and away from core classrooms and resources for all students. A referendum helps stabilize the general operational budget so all students have their needs met, not just those we are required to meet by law. If we were funded at 90%, we would have approximately $1 million in additional funds.

A: Because of Necedah’s high property values (largely due to lakefront properties), the state considers Necedah a high property wealth district. Under the current school funding formula, the state assumes the local community can afford to pay more of the total revenue limit. Currently, local taxpayers are responsible for about 78% of the district's total revenue limit, while state aid covers a mere 22%. The referendum is a short-term solution to offset state funding deficits, while the school board takes aggressive state-level action to advocate for local taxpayers.  

A: The legislature provided the percentage of reimbursement increase as a “sum certain” appropriation. This means there was a specific amount of money for this purpose, and the amount would be shared for all school districts. The total increase fell short of the communicated strategy to provide 42-45% reimbursement of special education costs. Currently, it is predicted to be approximately 35%. 

A: Key Priorities: 

• Personalized Learning
  Instruction is tailored to student strengths, interests, and post-secondary goals.
• Hands-On, Project-Based Learning
  Students engage in meaningful, real-world projects that build problem-solving and collaboration skills.
• Learning Beyond the Classroom
  Experiences inside and outside school walls connect learning to careers, community, and the real world.
• Writing for Graduation
  Writing is a graduation requirement and a critical skill developed across all content areas.
• Graduate Profile Skills
  Every graduate demonstrates:
  • Citizenship
  • Communication
  • Life Skills
  • World-Class Knowledge
• Purposeful Pathways
  Flexible pathways aligned with student interests and post-secondary goals, including technical college, workforce, military, and four-year options. Not all students need a goal of a 4-Year college and we are developing pathways for every aspiration.

A: Small class size strengthens relationships between students and educators, improves classroom management, and increases student engagement, particularly for younger learners and students with additional needs. With a school district priority of personalization, Necedah schools provide more individualized instruction, timely feedback, and targeted support. Research consistently shows that students in smaller classes demonstrate stronger academic growth, improved behavior, and higher long-term achievement, making small class sizes a foundational investment in educational quality. In 2018 when the district passed its first operational referendum, the community shared that small class sizes were a top priority. Again in 2022, maintaining small class sizes was at the top of the priority list.

A: Overall, our students are meeting academic expectations across grade levels. At the elementary level, this success was formally recognized when the school earned the School of Distinction designation for the 2024–25 school year, reflecting strong instruction, student growth, and achievement.

Our high-performing students consistently demonstrate the skills needed to succeed beyond high school. Many graduates go on to professional careers that require college-level degrees, including fields such as healthcare, education, and other skilled professions. Their success in real-world settings reflects both academic readiness and strong foundational skills.

At the same time, we intentionally prioritize multiple post-secondary pathways. Technical colleges and workforce-aligned training are a key focus as we prepare students for careers that are in high demand and do not require a traditional four-year degree. For these students, measures like the ACT are not required and should not be treated as a primary indicator of success if a four-year college is not their goal.

A:  The district has used natural attrition to make staffing reductions the past couple of years. These reductions have resulted in slightly higher class sizes in some grade levels; however, the district wanted to be prudent in order to address pending budget deficits. These changes have been made to save the district money, or to shift responsibilities to better meet the needs of students.

A: Since 2019–20, the district has taken meaningful steps to control long-term benefit costs. Changes to post-retirement liabilities produced savings exceeding $900,000. More recently, employees transitioned to a high-deductible health plan. In 2025, employee premium contributions resulted in an additional $90,000 in health care savings in 2025 alone. 

A:  The following is an analysis of the compensation structure for 2025-26. Support staff includes, Bus Drivers, Paraprofessionals, Secretaries, District Office, Custodians and Cooks 

A: Salaries and wages make up 73.8% of our current operating budget. Currently, Necedah’s salaries and wages are moderately competitive in the local market. The starting teacher salary is one of the lowest in the region; however, as staff with experience join us, we do consider this in their final offer. Compensation is one of many factors when seeking new staff and it is difficult to competitively pay employees while staying within the revenue limit.

A:  A facility assessment was completed in 2019. The school board focused on addressing deferred maintenance and other end-of-life equipment that was beginning to experience expensive maintenance costs. The school board was deliberate and thoughtful in determining priorities that needed improvement and how these decisions would affect our taxpayers. The district has experienced ongoing water drainage issues that negatively impacted the school building’s structural integrity and hard surfaces across campus due to prolonged water retention.

The district intentionally delayed these repairs until the existing debt schedule allowed the work to be completed without increasing the tax burden, as the costs were layered into current obligations. Addressing these issues at this time was a fiscally responsible decision that maximized resources while minimizing additional costs.

A:  The school board is deliberate and thoughtful when making financial decisions that affect our taxpayers. The district has experienced ongoing water drainage issues that have negatively impacted both the school building’s structural integrity and the hard surfaces across campus where water has been retained. The need to expand the parking lot has existed for many years, and addressing it during this project presented a cost-effective opportunity while construction was already underway. Making this improvement as part of the planned work was a fiscally responsible decision that maximized resources and minimized additional costs.

The district intentionally delayed these repairs until the existing debt schedule allowed for additional debt to be issued without increasing the tax burden, as the costs were layered into current obligations. The parking lot foundation, in particular, was compromised by prolonged water flow and required full replacement. After 28 years of daily use by hundreds of vehicles—combined with persistent water retention issues—the parking lot had reached the end of its service life and needed to be replaced.

A: The large window coverings in each commons area were funded through a DOJ Safety Grant in 2019. These coverings are designed to harden interior targets by reducing visibility of students and staff within the building. Their installation was a recommendation from the Department of Justice and local law enforcement. To manage costs responsibly, the district phased in the installation over three years, ensuring all classroom-area windows were covered to enhance student safety.

A:  Yes. We issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) this fall and received one bid. That proposal would have increased costs to the district by more than $250,000 compared to our current services, which include the annual purchase of a school bus.

A: In 2022 we began collaborating with Data Wrangler to use diagnostic tools to assess when and where we are seeing spikes in energy. Through this assessment we were able to find monthly savings by avoiding usage during peak times of the day, or when costs of utilities are at its highest. We have modified usage within our kitchen areas, with HVAC scheduling, and scheduling other energy-use systems. 

An energy project was completed in 2016 but we have continued to replace existing old fixtures with LED-style equipment as we’ve progressed to save money in long-term electricity expenses.

Occupancy sensors have been installed in classroom spaces to control both lighting and HVAC systems, allowing these areas to operate only when they are in use. This automation is expected to generate significant long-term savings by reducing unnecessary energy consumption. In addition, improvements to the building envelope and the replacement of plumbing fixtures has led to minimizing energy and water waste, further enhancing overall efficiency.

In 2023, the district received a grant from OneEnergy Renewables to install an initial set of solar panels as a first step toward reducing our reliance on the electrical grid. While this initial installation will have a limited immediate impact on overall energy usage, it established the necessary infrastructure to expand our solar capacity in the future. This project was completed at minimal cost to the district. The first solar array was installed in December 2023, along with infrastructure designed to support additional panels over time, maximizing long-term energy savings.

In 2024, the district expanded its solar capacity by installing additional panels through a lease structure paired with available tax credits. This seven-year project is financially sustainable due to the combination of incentives and annual energy savings. For instance, the projected five-year savings total $117,372, compared to project costs of $115,000 over the same period. Once the seven-year payoff period ends, the district will realize only net savings, as the panels will be fully paid for and ongoing maintenance costs are minimal—especially when compared to other projects with lifespans exceeding twelve years. This investment provides a long-term positive impact on the district’s operational budget.

A: With the 2023 referendum building project we used internal staff to complete a lot of work/labor of the project. We saved approximately $100,000 on our 2024 work plan to complete various aspects of the project including demo, transporting, reconstructing, finishing details, and much more. 

Over the past couple of years, we have replaced equipment to create greater efficiencies. To help offset the cost of any new equipment, we have resold the old equipment. 

The district has partnered with other small rural districts to increase efficiency and reduce programming costs. By delivering certain services in-house rather than relying on CESA 5 service contracts, we have achieved savings of 17–20%. In addition, we collaborate directly with the New Lisbon School District to share staff and programs, further reducing expenses and maximizing resources.

The district has worked diligently to consolidate labor and responsibilities across the district to create efficiencies. These efforts have resulted in effective redundancies as well as efficient operations. 

A: Yes. The Board and Superintendent are engaging in aggressive State-Level Taxpayer Advocacy, and will be engaging the community in March to join us.  We have attended town hall meetings, sent formal appeals to legislators, and provided testimony at state budget hearings.  We are demanding that the state use its surplus to fund a predictable, sustainable revenue source and increase special education reimbursement to at least 60% (closer to the 90% given to private schools). Our goal is to fix the system so that local referenda are no longer the only way to fund general operations of our schools, taking the chronic burden of constitutional mandates off the back of local taxpayers.

A: The district is considering all options to advocate for local taxpayers, because gaps in current state funding policy have reached a breaking point. These gaps have created chronic injustice by forcing the school board to ask local taxpayers for funding. Specifically, the school board has identified three critical issues:

• Adequate Fair Funding Support: Currently, the state funds special education for private school students at 90%, while public school students in Necedah receive only a projected 38%. This forces the district to divert millions ($13,169,377.88 over the past decade) of dollars away from general education, student supports, busing, technology, and extracurriculars to cover federally mandated services. During the last eight years, 100% of the district’s operational referenda—totaling $6,680,000—have been used to cover these shortfalls.

• Reducing Referendum Reliance: The state has increasingly shifted its constitutional responsibility to fund schools onto the backs of local Necedah residents. The district believes it is unconstitutional for "core state functions"—like basic school operations and special education funding—to depend on the uncertain outcome of local popular votes (referenda) and/or divert the responsibility of funding solely to local taxpayers.
   
• Protecting Your Pocketbook: As a high property wealth district, Necedah taxpayers are currently forced to pick up 78% of the school’s revenue limit, while some taxpayers in other school districts pay $0%. By challenging the state, the district is fighting for a more stable and predictable funding model that relies on state aid rather than constantly asking local homeowners for property tax increases through referenda.

Local Necedah taxpayers can learn how to get involved by filling out the following Taxpayer Advocacy Interest Form. Link to Form 

A: We are not alone. In 2023, 258 out of 421 school districts in Wisconsin used referendum dollars to function. Referenda have become the de facto state funding policy. Small, rural districts like ours are hit hardest because we lack the "economies of scale" found in larger cities, making every unfunded mandate and inflationary cost much more impactful on our daily operations. 

A: While a referendum does impact the local levy, the district works hard to offset these costs by balancing out savings and a return on taxpayer investment. For example, in 2025-26, the district achieved a mill rate decrease of $0.02 compared to the previous year. Additionally, because we are a high property wealth district, our residents often qualify for higher-than-average school tax levy credits on their tax bills, which helps mitigate the overall impact of the school levy. 

A: To minimize the tax impact on the community, the School Board approved a funding plan that combines modest annual increases with the responsible use of available savings (fund balance). Each year, a portion of the referendum amount is offset by district reserves to reduce the amount that must be raised through property taxes. As a result, the estimated tax impact is approximately $0.17 per $1,000 of assessed value, which equals about $2.83 per month for a home valued at $200,000.

A: The district is considering all options to advocate for local taxpayers, because gaps in current state funding policy have reached a breaking point. These gaps have created chronic injustice by forcing the school board to ask local taxpayers for funding. Specifically, the school board has identified three critical issues:

Adequate Fair Funding Support: Currently, the state funds special education for private school students at 90%, while public school students in Necedah receive only a projected 38%. This forces the district to divert millions ($13,169,377.88 over the past decade) of dollars away from general education, student supports, busing, technology, and extracurriculars to cover federally mandated services. During the last eight years, 100% of the district’s operational referenda—totaling $6,680,000—have been used to cover these shortfalls.

Reducing Referendum Reliance: The state has increasingly shifted its constitutional responsibility to fund schools onto the backs of local Necedah residents. The district believes it is unconstitutional for "core state functions"—like basic school operations and special education funding—to depend on the uncertain outcome of local popular votes (referenda) and/or divert the responsibility of funding solely to local taxpayers.

Protecting Your Pocketbook: As a high property wealth district, Necedah taxpayers are currently forced to pick up 78% of the school’s revenue limit, while some taxpayers in other school districts pay $0%. By challenging the state, the district is fighting for a more stable and predictable funding model that relies on state aid rather than constantly asking local homeowners for property tax increases through referenda.

Local Necedah taxpayers can learn how to get involved by filling out the following Taxpayer Advocacy Interest Form. Link to Form