Rhinelander electors OK tight school district budget, tax levy amid state aid shortfall

The School District of Rhinelander held its annual meeting of the electors Monday, Oct. 27, where a balanced budget was proposed. That budget, said Eric Burke, superintendent of schools, was made possible due to an operational referendum that passed last April.

“This balanced budget reflects the district’s continued commitment to responsible financial stewardship while maintaining high quality educational opportunities for all students,” he said. “The budget remains somewhat tenuous due to the uncertainty surrounding federal funding grants and the rising costs of essential services and supplies.” He said the district would need to closely monitor expenditures in the coming school year. The 2026-27 school year would bring continued challenges due to the state funding model, as well. 

The state, Burke said, had also not increased school funding in line with the increase in the consumer price index, meaning schools have a difficult time coping with rising inflation as well as other things such as offering competitive wages for faculty and staff. He said another growing concern was the continued expansion of state tax dollars being redirected to private school voucher programs. The redirection of these funds compounds the financial issues felt in public school systems like Rhinelander. These issues place special burdens on rural school systems, Burke said, but the community has shown strong support for the school system, and said the district would continue to do incredible things, despite being asked to do more with less.

Director of business services Bob Thom reviewed the budget for those in attendance. There was some discussion regarding state aid to rural school and the formula used to allocate aid to schools. For a rural school district such as Rhinelander, which is rich in property value, but also experiencing dropping enrollment, down over 1,000 students in the last 25 years, state aid is decreasing, while state aid in the southeastern part of the state is growing.

The promise for state aid was two-thirds funding, Thom said, which would mean the district would be receiving 66 percent of their funding from state aid. Instead 79 percent of that funding is coming from property taxes, as only 21 percent is coming from state aid. 

“The issue is that schools don’t shrink very well,” he said, when a class size goes from 20 to 18, for example, fixed expenses do not change, meaning lost revenue due to fewer students is not correlated directly with the financial outlay for the school system.

Thom said the property value for the district as a whole increased by 11.43 percent in the last year, which is higher than the state average, which is just over 8 percent. The dollar amount of the tax levy, he said would go up 14.34 percent, but the mil rate would only increase by $0.20, from $7.43 to $7.63. When the referendum passed, he said, it was expected the mil rate would increase by $0.50.

He then proceeded to review the rest of the budget, which showed the district was attempting to hold down expenses as much as possible. But, he told those in attendance, that it expenditures, at $39,046,170, was a very “tight” number, and was not keeping pace with inflation and increased costs.

There were a number of resolutions on which those in attendance, who lived in the district, could vote. The first was the tax levy for transportation, sites, buildings, maintenance and operation of the school and community service, and to retire debt and pay interest on the debt. The levy for transportation, sites, buildings, maintenance and operation of the school for 2025-26 would be $26,980,318. The levy used to retire debt and pay interest would be $1,893,000 for fund 39 and $114,322 for fund 38. The tax levy for community service was set at $1,400,000.

The next resolution was to reimburse board members for actual and necessary expenses for travel for board members in the performance of their duties.

Another resolution that passed authorized the school district to provide for prosecution and defense of any legal action or proceedings in which the school district is interested.

The fourth resolution established minimum distance for student transportation. Walking distance for students within the city limits would be two miles for both secondary students in grades 6-12 as well as elementary students in grades 4-5. For elementary students in grades 1-3, that walking distance was set at one mile. For kindergarten and four-year-old kindergarten (4K) students was up the three-quarters of a mile.

Walking distances to a safe bus stop outside the city limits was set at three-quarters of a mile for secondary students in grades 6-12 as well as elementary students in grades 4-5. For students in 4K through third grade, the walking distance would be up to one-half of a mile.

The resolution also mandated that kindergarten and 4K students must have a parent, responsible adult, child supervisor who was at least 12 years of age or a child who had a babysitting certificate be present to send and/or receive those children to and from a school bus stop. Exceptions, however, could be approved by the superintendent or his/her designee.

By resolution, the annual meeting of electors for 2026 was set for 5:30 p.m. on Oct. 26. 

With that, the meeting of the electors was adjourned and the board of education special meeting called to order. The motion was made to approve the 2025-26 tax levy as follows:

General fund – Fund 10 in the amount of $26,980,318

Non-referendum debt – Fund 38 in the amount of $114,322

Referendum Debt – Fund 39 in the amount of $1,893,000

Community Service in the amount of $1,400,000

For a total of $30,387,640

That motion passed unanimously.

The next motion was to approve the proposed 2025-26 budget with a total revenue and expenditures set at $39,046,170. That motion passed unanimously as well.

Beckie Gaskill may be reached via email at [email protected].