Middleton-Cross Plains board approves Phase 1 sustainability package but delays Sauk Trail geothermal

The Middleton-Cross Plains Area School District Board of Education on Feb. 10 approved the district's Phase 1 sustainability projects and funding package but removed the Sauk Trail geothermal installation from the immediate work plan, voting to revisit that element at a later date.

The vote follows extensive public comment urging the board to adopt the most ambitious option, presentations from district staff and McKinstry on three financing and phasing options, and a lengthy board discussion about payback periods, federal incentives and local fiscal risk. Assistant Superintendent for Business Operations Jared Rosen reviewed the options and financing assumptions and said the original full Option 1 would move the district “26% closer” to its 100% renewable-energy goal and has an estimated 12-year payback with available incentives.

Why it matters: The board's vote keeps the district on a multi-year path toward the sustainability resolution it adopted in 2021 aiming for 100% renewable energy by 2035 while narrowing immediate financial exposure. The board and administration cited a mix of district reserve funds, utility incentives and projected energy savings as the financing plan; members cited uncertainty about federal tax-credit availability as a major variable.

Most important details: Public commenters — including Melissa Gavin, Kelly Hilliard, Brad Keller, Carol Phelps and Kevin Spittler — repeatedly urged the board to choose the most ambitious plan. Melissa Gavin, a Cross Plains resident, told the board: “I am asking you to take this moment to lead and to inspire and urge you to approve the original, the most ambitious proposal and approve all of the projects that are part of phase 1.” Kelly Hilliard, the City of Middleton’s sustainability coordinator and staff liaison to the local sustainability committee, said the city and district are seen as state leaders and said she supported Option 1.

Board deliberations mixed fiscal caution with urgency. Board member Bartlett Durand appealed to long-term responsibility, arguing that “if this board walks back on this sustainability resolution you need to look at that kid and every kid in our school and apologize every single day.” Board member Bob Hesselbein and others urged caution about relying on uncertain federal funding; Hesselbein said there was “no guarantee” the federal funds would be available and flagged the risk to operational budgets.

Administration and McKinstry presented three options: the full Option 1 (all recommended projects, including solar and geothermal), Option 2 (projects with a 20-year-or-less payback, which removes some geothermal and long-payback efficiency projects) and Option 3 (a tighter 15-year payback set). Rosen said the district has budgeted $3,000,000 from Fund 46 (long-term capital trust), approximately $300,000 in expected Focus on Energy incentives and $1,400,000 in capital-maintenance funds available to cover portions of Phase 1; McKinstry is expected to guarantee energy savings used in financing calculations.

Action taken: The board approved the Phase 1 sustainability project and funding package with the Sauk Trail geothermal component removed. The board directed administration to return to the board with updated information on the Sauk Trail geothermal proposal at a future meeting (board members discussed June as a target for review, recognizing some state and federal budget items may not be settled by then).

Votes at a glance: The motion to approve Phase 1 excluding the Sauk Trail geothermal passed by voice vote (recorded as approved in the meeting minutes). A separate motion to approve Sauk Trail geothermal as part of Phase 1 failed on a roll call vote (the board recorded the motion as defeated and stated it would revisit the item).

Context and next steps: Administration said many Phase 1 projects (rooftop solar work and energy-efficiency measures) could begin as soon as contractors are awarded and that meeting “safe-harbor” requirements for federal tax credits could be achieved by demonstrating early procurement or other qualifying steps. The board asked administration to return with a report in the coming months so members could reassess the Sauk Trail geothermal proposal if federal or state funding conditions change.

Ending: The board framed the decision as a compromise between urgency and prudence: it advances sustainability work now while isolating a high-cost, long-payback piece for later and further review.