Questions & Answers on the Referendum - Brodhead School District

While it’s sometimes possible to reduce staff, and we have done so, it’s not always as simple as it
looks. With 100 fewer students, it might seem that three or four teachers could easily be eliminated.
Unfortunately, those students are spread across 14 grades (4K-12), and the decline in enrollment
only rarely reduces the size of any one grade enough to eliminate a teaching position. Occasionally
it works out where this is possible, and we have reduced to three sections in many grades.... but, it
doesn’t always work out that way. We have, however, eliminated eight teaching positions in the
past three years, as well as cutbacks in administration and support staff.
I’ve heard claims that Brodhead is “top-heavy” on administration. How does the district
compare to other districts our size?
Budget cuts have resulted in the elimination of one administrative position (curriculum director
combined with the MS Principal’s duties), and another position has been reduced to part-time.
Brodhead is quite average in its level of administrative staff when compared with other districts of
its size. Yes, we have more administrators than our much smaller neighbors, Juda and Albany. We
also have fewer administrators than our larger neighbor, Monroe. Among districts similar in size
and composition to Brodhead, like our Rock Valley conference members, our administrative
staffing pattern is common. One notable difference is that many of these districts have an assistant
principal working in their high school and/or middle school. Instead of an assistant principal, we
have an instructional aide (paid at aide wages rather than an administrative-level salary) covering
those duties and staffing an in-school suspension and mentorship room. The web site provides a
worksheet comparing administrative positions across Rock Valley Conference schools.
Why doesn’t the District just spend it’s “slush fund” to fix the budget deficit, rather than
presenting a referendum?
The term “slush fund” is misleading and inappropriate, and likely refers to the District’s “fund
balance”. This is an accounting term, identifying the District’s positive balance of assets over
liabilities at the end of each budget year on June 30 th .
The District’s fund balance is expected to end the current budget year at $2.4 million, or just over
22% of our annual budget. It is the Board’s intention to spend down some of this balance to retire
debt, and to use it to cover the shortfall between anticipated deficits and the lower amount of funds
requested in the referendum.
The main purpose of the fund balance is cash flow. Let’s compare it to your household finances.
The District gets its money from local property taxes and state aid, much like you draw a paycheck.
Unlike a paycheck that you get monthly or bi-weekly, the District gets its money at irregular points
during the year, most of them later in the budget year. The fund balance carries the District between
those payments. Like your home checkbook account, the District’s fund balance is highest on the
day right after it receives payments from property tax or state aid (pay day for your account). As
the month progresses, you spend down that checkbook balance until it is probably nearly empty on
the day before payday. In a similar fashion, the District’s fund balance is actually near zero at some
points during the year.

Without this fund balance, or if the fund balance gets too small, the District would have to take out
loans to pay its bills between the aid payments. That approach would mean spending valuable tax
dollars on interest expenses for the borrowing... money that can be better spent on our children.
Is class size really a serious issue?
Simple logic would tell us that having fewer children sharing the teacher's attention would make
a better educational environment for all. Having fewer peers to compete with should also
improve a child's social development. But, is there data to support the importance of smaller
class sizes? Yes....
Wisconsin's SAGE program (Student Achievement Guarantee in Education) helps schools
achieve smaller class sizes, and has been in place for over ten years. Research on the SAGE
program tells us that smaller class sizes at the elementary school level really do improve the
education of children. Similar research in Tennessee has produced the same conclusions.
Wisconsin's SAGE program requires class sizes of 15-18 students per classroom in grades K-3.
We cannot participate in the Wisconsin program because our class numbers are too high.
However, it is still good for our children if we can keep our class sizes lower, even if we cannot
reach the recommended levels.
A complete breakdown of our elementary school class sizes, along with a nine-year history, is
available on our web site.
Are you sure there aren’t other areas of “fat” that can still be cut, other than the programs
listed, rather than asking for additional funding thru a referendum?
The Board presents the referendum reluctantly, and only after years of working on budget
reductions. We are convinced that the cuts that must come next to balance the budget without a
referendum will be unacceptable to our community. This referendum is necessary to maintain a
competitive, quality educational program for our children, an important component of a strong
community.
What does the school budget and referendum have to do with a “strong community”?
Beyond our common interest in providing a great education for our children and grandkids, a
good school system is a vital part of a healthy community. The quality of the local school system
has been identified by both individuals and businesses as one of the things they look for when
they consider where to settle down. A recent study in Virginia suggests that for every $1
invested in public schools, the local community saw $1.50 in economic benefits. And, with the
“graying” of our population, don’t we want as many of our young people competitively prepared
for good jobs as possible?
What if the referendum generates “extra” money, or the state increases its level of aid to the
schools, and the District finds that it does not need all the money requested?
The amounts requested in the referendum may not be exceeded, but they do not have to be fully
levied. And, by law, the referendum revenues can be spent only for the stated purpose... the
maintenance of current programs and facilities, and retirement of debt.

It was the Board’s intent, when planning this referendum, to ask for only what they believed was
needed to maintain current programs and balance the budget. In keeping with that philosophy, it
is their expressed intent that if they find in future years the full referendum amount is not needed,
it will not be levied. For example, if we experience an unexpected growth in student enrollment,
budget deficits would not grow as fast as projected and the District may be able to tax for fewer
dollars than allowed with passage of a referendum.