Middleton-Cross Plains board tables sustainability package but OKs borrowing authorization

The Middleton‑Cross Plains Area School District on Monday discussed a $13.5 million phase‑one sustainability package that would add geothermal at Sauk Trail Elementary, district‑wide solar arrays, electric bus chargers and controls upgrades — then voted to postpone final approval of the package while moving forward with a separate resolution to authorize borrowing to fund the work.

Supporters urged quick action. Kevin Spittler, a member of the district sustainability committee, told the board the projects “are expensive, [but] they will pay for themselves over time,” and cited other districts’ energy savings as an example.

The proposal presented by Assistant Superintendent for Business Operations Jared Rosing and consultants described a financing path that mixes $3 million from a district Fund 46 trust, federal direct‑pay tax credits tied to the Inflation Reduction Act, and performance contracting with McKinstry. Rosing said, “the chart in the middle of page 3 shows you the amount of avoided energy costs that McKinstry will guarantee for the first 20 years.” He and the consultants said the guaranteed savings would be used to cover principal and interest on borrowed funds.

Board members requested more detail on the Sauk Trail geothermal cost and how sustainability projects would interact with the district’s regular capital‑maintenance schedule. Several trustees asked for a clearer, consolidated packet that ties roof and boiler replacements and other near‑term capital needs to the proposed sustainability upgrades so voters and board members can see the tradeoffs.

After two hours of discussion, the board voted on a motion to table the phase‑one approval so administrators could provide further financial detail. A roll call on the tabling motion produced mixed votes and the motion to table passed; the board scheduled a return discussion for its next regular meeting. Separately, the board approved a resolution authorizing the district to borrow up to $10,485,000 to support eligible projects; that borrowing authorization triggers a 30‑day petition period during which district voters may seek to force a referendum if they gather the statutorily required signatures.

Rosing and consultants told the board several scenarios were modeled, including a conservative “worst‑case” in which federal tax credits were not available; in that scenario the district’s net annual cost could be about $60,000, Rosing said, an amount he described as manageable within future budgets. The presenters also described a more likely scenario in which direct‑pay tax credits and energy incentives reduce net borrowing needs so that the annual debt service would be covered by contracted energy savings.

Board members raised timing and communications concerns. Several trustees asked the administration to present (1) a clearer comparison of projects by payback period and expected savings, (2) the Fund 46 balance available to seed the work, and (3) an itemized “a la carte” version of the Sauk Trail scope so the board could consider alternatives.

The administration agreed to return with condensed materials linking the district’s capital maintenance plan, roof and boiler replacement schedules and the sustainability roadmap, and to brief the district’s sustainability committee before the next board meeting.

The motions on Monday produced two formal outcomes: the phase‑one sustainability package was tabled for further detail and the borrowing resolution authorizing up to $10,485,000 in general obligation promissory notes advanced. If no valid petition is filed during the 30‑day period, the district may proceed with the borrowing process, which will include sale terms and interest rates that the board must later approve.

The board’s decision split the difference between trustees who urged immediate action to secure federal incentives and those who wanted a tighter public packet showing how sustainability work intersects with other planned capital projects.

A public comment period included one speaker; Kevin Spittler asked the board to back the phase‑one measures and thanked board president Sheila Hibner for her service.

Going forward, the administration said it will provide the requested financial scenarios and a prioritized project list in advance of the next board meeting.