Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Eau Claire Area School Board adopts 2024–25 budgets and tax levies; referendum on Nov. 5 remains pivotal
Summary
The Eau Claire Area School Board voted unanimously to approve two versions of the 2024–25 budget and corresponding tax levies — one that assumes voter approval of a Nov. 5 capital and operating referendum and one that does not. Board members and staff outlined a multi‑million dollar deficit that the referendum is intended to address.
The Eau Claire Area School Board on Oct. 7 approved two 2024–25 recommended budgets and the corresponding tax levies — one dependent on voter approval of the district referendum and one that would take effect if voters reject the referendum. The board voted by roll call to adopt the budgets after a presentation from the district’s finance staff; the vote was unanimous.
The measures matter because the district is projecting a large shortfall without referendum revenue. Director of Business Services Dr. Elworthy told the board that October 15 state aid figures were about $500,000 lower than the July estimate, which increased the district’s property‑tax responsibility and contributed to a projected deficit of $12,425,250 in the budget without the referendum. The district’s unaudited end‑of‑year deficit was reported as $7,368,743.
In an overview, Dr. Elworthy said staffing remains the largest portion of the operating budget and reiterated that the board must adopt two budgets and two levies because the referendum question will appear on the Nov. 5 ballot. He presented a budget summary showing revenues and expenses by fund, noted changes in per‑pupil and equalized aid, and described how the levy and mill rate interact: “Levy is total dollars,” he said, and the mill rate is calculated relative to property values.
Dr. Elworthy also reviewed capital referendum spending: the district has spent nearly $24 million in prior referendum years (unaudited) and projects slightly more than $42 million in referendum‑funded expenditures next year. He said some federal ESSER III funds had to be spent by Sept. 30, 2024, and that ESSER II/III dollars had been used for summer and after‑school programming.
During discussion, board members thanked staff for budget work. Commissioner Zert expressed personal concern about approving a deficit budget even temporarily: “I just wanted to express my extreme concern for that deficit,” Zert said, and asked what would happen if voters did not approve the referendum. Zert said she planned to support the motion but wanted the concern recorded.
No members of the public signed up to speak during the required public hearing, and the board closed the hearing before taking the adoption vote. Commissioner Clements moved to adopt the 2024–25 recommended budgets and tax levies as presented (referendum‑dependent and not); Commissioner DeMent seconded. The roll call vote recorded votes in favor from Commissioners Nordine, Azure, Veiga, Clements, DeMent and Farrar; the motion passed and the budgets and levies were approved.
The district expects auditors to present the final audit in January. Because the adopted set includes a referendum‑dependent budget, the Nov. 5 referendum outcome will determine which budget and levy the district implements for 2024–25.
