Beloit School Board approves referendum question to exceed revenue limit; 6-1 votes set ballot language and election

The Beloit School District Board of Education on Jan. 16 approved resolutions to adopt ballot language and to place a multi-year referendum on the spring election asking voters to exceed the district revenue limit by $9,170,000 for 2025-26, $14,120,000 for 2026-27 and $16,950,000 for 2027-28. Board members voted 6-1 both times; Board member Brian Nichols cast the lone no vote.

The referendum package, as presented by district administrators, centers on four priorities: (1) staff compensation and retention, (2) academic interventions (literacy and math programs), (3) behavioral supports (including additional paraprofessionals and dean/assistant principal positions) and (4) limited facility maintenance and restoration of fund balance. Dr. Garrison, the district superintendent, told the board the proposal reflects a scenario known in staff briefings as “H2” and represents estimated, not guaranteed, costs.

Why it matters: District officials said the referendum is intended to prevent deeper cuts that could undermine classroom staffing and day-to-day operations. Administrators told the board the district faces multi‑year deficits without additional revenue, including a projected shortfall that could require tens of millions in reductions over coming years if no referendum passes.

Board discussion and clarifications Dr. Garrison and district staff reviewed estimated three‑year totals for proposed priorities. The administration presented these illustrative figures (three‑year totals unless otherwise noted): $1.68 million for math programs (Eureka Math, Imagine Math), roughly $2.84 million for behavioral supports (six behavioral support positions, two dean-of-students positions, paraprofessional support), and an estimated $1.669 million in new recurring personnel costs in the first-year H2 scenario (the presentation showed how that first‑year figure multiplies over three years in the model). Dr. Garrison emphasized these were estimates and that specific salary decisions would not be finalized through the referendum.

Board members pressed for detail on several topics that administrators addressed during the meeting. Key points recorded in the discussion: - Benefits: Administrators confirmed that the presented compensation figures include benefits costs as well as wages. - Vacancy savings: The board asked what happens if positions funded by the referendum cannot be filled. The district said budgeted but unfilled positions would generally produce year‑end savings that could flow back into fund balance; staff noted some savings are offset by overtime, overload pay or other costs when substitutes or existing staff cover duties. - Behavioral supports: Several board members compared behavioral specialists to instructional coaches, saying the goal should be skill-building to reduce future disciplinary incidents. Administrators and student‑services staff described the proposed behavioral roles as both responsive and preventive — supporting teachers and students in classrooms as well as helping manage incidents that require discipline. - Virtual tutors: The board asked for evidence on the proposed $180,000 allocation for virtual reading tutors. District staff said they did not have outcome data on virtual tutors immediately available at the meeting but offered to provide research or program results on request. - Facilities and transportation: Administrators clarified major facility projects (roofs, Hackett green space) and transportation needs will not be fully funded within this referendum; facilities work would be limited to relatively small, one‑time items given the constrained surplus (administration estimated roughly $400,000 of remainder in the three‑year package available for maintenance or fund balance). Transportation improvements remain a priority for future discussion.

Fund balance and timeline Dr. Garrison explained fund balance is used for cashflow and to cover costs between state and local payments; the district currently falls short of its policy target (18% fund balance). The administration warned that a one‑year referendum would likely postpone but not eliminate the need for further reductions in subsequent years. Board members debated shorter versus longer referendum timelines; several members argued a multi‑year ask gives more stability to hiring and planning, while one member urged considering a smaller, one‑year ask to rebuild trust with voters.

Public comment and email The board clerk read an email received from a resident opposing additional spending and urging the board to “vote no on spending millions” until academic performance improves. Several board members referenced past referendum defeats and said community outreach and clear reporting on outcomes will be critical if the referendum moves forward.

Votes at a glance - Resolution adopting ballot language to exceed the revenue limit by $9,170,000 (2025-26), $14,120,000 (2026-27) and $16,950,000 (2027-28): Motion by Greg Schneider; seconded by Amy Levy. Roll call: Greg Schneider — Aye; Amy Levy — Aye; Brian Nichols — Nay; Brian Anderson — Aye; Tom Hankins — Aye; Megan Miller — Aye; Tia Johnson — Aye. Outcome: Approved, 6–1. - Resolution providing for a referendum election to place the question on the ballot (title and the same amounts as above): Motion by Greg Schneider; seconded by Amy Levy. Roll call: Greg Schneider — Aye; Amy Levy — Aye; Brian Nichols — Nay; Brian Anderson — Aye; Tom Hankins — Aye; Megan Miller — Aye; Tia Johnson — Aye. Outcome: Approved, 6–1.

What happens next With the board’s approval the district will place the question on the upcoming spring ballot and continue outreach and reporting to the public about how proposed funds would be used. Administrators said they will provide additional data requested by the board — including evidence on virtual tutoring and regular reports on how new resources are implemented if voters approve the referendum.

Ending Board President Tia Johnson closed the meeting after the votes and the board adjourned. Several members urged continued internal work on cost reductions and community engagement before the election.