West Allis-West Milwaukee School District officials presented a projected, balanced budget for the 2025–26 school year at a public budget hearing Monday, but warned the district’s proposed tax levy and property tax rate will rise as a result of private-school voucher costs, declining equalized property value and special-education transfer claims. "At this point, we're proud to present to the board a balanced budget tonight," Assistant Superintendent Norris said during the presentation.

The hearing offered the public and board a detailed review of projected revenues and expenditures and the factors that changed the district’s preliminary deficit into a balanced plan. Norris said a combination of updated state aid figures, lower-than-expected health insurance renewal costs, reassigning some costs to fund 80, and reductions to planned transfers to the capital trust helped close an earlier $2.65 million shortfall.

Why it matters: the district’s proposed total tax levy is projected at $56,271,000, with a proposed mill rate of 8.05. Norris and the presentation showed that private-school vouchers account for a sizable share of the levy and that a decline in equalized property value is increasing the district’s mill rate even where levy growth is limited.

Most important details: Norris walked the board through the revenue timetable used in Wisconsin school finance and said the district’s revenue-limit authority is about $109 million. Projected equalization aid withdrawn from that figure leaves an allowable tax levy of about $48.2 million for the district’s general operations, with additional levies for referendum debt and community-service funds bringing the total proposed levy to $56.27 million. The district’s equalized property value was shown as roughly $6.99 billion; a 2.42% projected decrease in equalized value contributed to the higher mill rate.

Norris also detailed changes since the preliminary budget: the state biennial budget signed July 3 (Senate Bill 45) preserved the $3.25 per-pupil statutory increase used in planning; special-education reimbursement increased to 42% for the current year (budgeted in practice at about 40%); and the school-based mental-health grant was increased for one year. Norris said health-insurance renewal came in at 11% (better than earlier estimates near 24%), which produced several hundred thousand dollars of savings.

Private vouchers and transfer-of-service claims: board member Becker pressed for specifics about voucher costs. Becker asked, "When a student attends a voucher school, is it true that 100% of that cost comes from property taxes?" Norris replied, "In the first year, yes...100% of that $1,182,000 will come from property taxpayers. Now after that, subsequently, there is an aid component to that." The presentation said private vouchers make up roughly 9.4% of the proposed levy and about 18% of the non-referendum levy; the district receives approximately $11,800 per voucher student but may pay more for some high-school voucher placements, creating a net shortfall for those students under current state payment formulas. Norris also noted this is the last year of the state’s voucher enrollment cap; next year the cap will be removed, and the budgetary effect is uncertain.

Special education and transfer of service: Norris described the transfer-of-service process the district uses to request additional revenue when it takes over services previously provided elsewhere. He said about 193 students who receive special-education services moved into the district last year, generating claims that can be hundreds of thousands of dollars but are reimbursed in part only in the following year under state rules. "These claims can vary...this year, it's gonna be much more," he said, noting prior-year claims and the way reimbursement timing affects first-year budgets.

Other changes and funds: Norris explained reductions and reassignments that helped balance the budget: moving SROs to fund 80, reducing the transfer to the capital trust (Fund 46) from $1 million to $500,000, reclassifying custodial time to a different fund, and using carryforward balances. He reviewed Fund 38 (energy efficiency), Fund 39 (referendum debt service), Fund 46 (capital trust), Fund 49 (referendum capital projects with a roughly $56 million projected ending balance), Fund 50 (food service) and Fund 73 (OPEB/benefits). He also noted the district’s credit rating upgrade improved bond interest rates and lowered borrowing costs.

Public comment and board action: the hearing included a public-comment period focused specifically on the budget; no members of the public signed up to speak and no formal board action on the budget was taken at the meeting. President Burns closed the public-budget portion and said detailed questions would be addressed as part of the formal adoption process in October. "Proper notice of this meeting has been posted in accordance with the open meeting laws of the state of Wisconsin," Burns said at the start of the meeting.

What’s next: Norris said a pivotal date will be the third-Friday pupil count in September (the membership count that helps set recurring revenue), and the October 1 equalized-value certification by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue will finalize the mill-rate calculation. The board will take formal action on the levy in October and certify figures to the state in November.

Ending: The hearing provided the public a full review of the district’s current revenue assumptions and stated trade-offs; board members asked clarifying questions but took no immediate vote. "I appreciate you guys, the support through the budget process," Norris said at the end of his presentation.