Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Budget topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Fond du Lac Board approves $7.4 million in 2025–26 budget reductions, eliminating 83 positions

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Fond du Lac Board of Education on April 14 approved a slate of budget reductions for 2025–26 that district leaders say will save about $7.4 million and eliminate 83 positions; the vote was 7–0 amid public calls for delay and transparency.

The Fond du Lac Board of Education voted 7–0 on April 14 to approve the district's proposed 2025–26 budget reductions, which district administrators said total roughly $7.4 million and eliminate 83 positions. Board members also approved a separate resolution to defease certain 2020 bonds and two assistant-principal contracts later in the meeting.

The approved reductions include schedule and workload changes at the middle and high school levels, a cut to a cash-in-lieu insurance benefit, scaled-back contracted services and other staff reductions. Superintendent Dr. Mark (Matt) Flagg and district administrator Mark Gerlach described the changes as necessary to address a projected operating shortfall and to avoid deeper damage to the district's fiscal stability.

Administrators told the board the district faces an estimated $7.5 million shortfall for the coming fiscal year and projected year-end reserves of about $17 million. Gerlach said those reserves are not a long-term solution and that further use of fund balance would likely require short-term borrowing that could add roughly $3.4 million in interest or borrowing costs if the district exhausted reserves and needed a cash-flow loan.

Why it matters: The cuts are designed to balance the budget without additional state revenue or a successful operational referendum. District leaders said the board must adopt a preliminary budget by June to have spending authority for the July 1 start of the new fiscal year.

Key reductions described by administrators

- Middle school schedule change: switching from a block schedule to a six-period day, reducing middle-school teaching positions by 18 and saving about $1.5 million. District staff said prep time per teacher would be reduced (from roughly 86 minutes to about 59).

- High school schedule change: moving teachers to a 6-of-8 teaching load, eliminating 21 teaching positions and saving about $1.7 million. Prep time was described as changing to about 72 minutes.

- Cash-in-lieu reduction: the annual payment to employees who decline district insurance would be cut from $6,000 to $3,000; administrators estimated the change would save about $711,000 (the program currently serves about 237 employees).

- Contracted services: scaled back or eliminated contracts with outside partners, estimated savings of about $591,314; administrators warned reductions will have a negative impact on student learning and culture.

- Additional staff reductions: elimination across custodial/maintenance, instructional assistants, secretaries/interpreters, teachers, and other categories totaling about $2.9 million.

Administration said the reductions sum to approximately $7.4 million and that, after placement efforts, 27 employees would not have a position; 14 of those are teachers. The district said it placed other affected employees into open positions where certification allowed.

Public comment and board questions

Multiple public commenters urged the board to delay final action and provide more public notice about proposed cuts before voting. Andy Bridal, president of the Fond du Lac Education Association, asked the board to postpone action on agenda item 6.02 because “the community deserves the opportunity to digest this information and give feedback before any decisions are made.” Tiffany Brault, president of the Fond du Lac City Council, likewise urged postponement and said, “Taking any action tonight would be doing so while leaving your community in the dark, and that is not good governance.” Resident John Matysick asked the board to delay decisions until newly elected members are seated.

Board members pressed administrators on details including fund-balance projections, timing of state aid, and how staff placements were handled. Gerlach and Dr. Flagg said the district had already discussed many of the options in fall budget work and in prior referendum information sessions; they emphasized that continued reliance on fund balance is unsustainable and that expenditure reductions are the remaining option absent new revenue.

Other community remarks during public comment raised related concerns: commenters questioned district administrator/head-count trends, the relative number of administrators versus classroom staff, and technology access and filtering for younger students.

Votes at a glance (formal actions taken April 14)

- Consent agenda (minutes, personnel recommendations, resignations, bimonthly financial report) - Motion: Approve consent agenda as presented. - Mover/Second: Motion by Mr. Godfrey; seconded by Mr. Henschel. - Vote: Godfrey — yes; Henschel — yes; Horth — yes; Labarins — yes; Motor — yes; Pinnell — yes; Schrider — yes. - Tally: 7 yes, 0 no. Outcome: approved.

- Resolution to authorize transfer of funds, establish an escrow account and defease certain general obligation refunding bonds (Series 2020A, dated 10/13/2020) - Motion: Approve resolution authorizing transfer of funds, establishment of escrow account and defeasance of certain general obligation refunding bonds, Series 2020A (10/13/2020). - Mover/Second: Motion by Mr. Henschel; seconded by Mr. Godfrey. - Vote: same roll call; Tally: 7 yes, 0 no. Outcome: approved. Administrators estimated interest savings of about $1.1 million over the life of the refunded borrowing.

- Approval of 2025–26 budget reductions (main item) - Motion: Approve proposed 2025–26 budget reductions as presented. - Mover/Second: Motion by Mr. Godfrey; seconded by Mr. Henschel. - Vote: same roll call; Tally: 7 yes, 0 no. Outcome: approved.

- High school assistant principal contract (Stephen Rosencrantz) - Motion: Approve contract for high school assistant principal Stephen Rosencrantz for 2025–26 and 2026–27 at $100,924. - Mover/Second: Motion by Mr. Henschel; seconded by Mr. Godfrey. - Vote: same roll call; Tally: 7 yes, 0 no. Outcome: approved.

- Middle school assistant principal contract (Nathan Brownbeil) - Motion: Approve contract for Sebast/Sebas (middle) assistant principal Nathan Brownbeil for 2025–26 and 2026–27 at $100,924. - Mover/Second: Motion by Mr. Godfrey; seconded by Mr. Henschel. - Vote: same roll call; Tally: 7 yes, 0 no. Outcome: approved.

- Adjournment to executive session to consider preliminary notices of nonrenewal (Wis. Stat. 19.85(1)(c)) - Motion: Adjourn to executive session pursuant to Wis. Stat. 19.85(1)(c) to consider employment matters. - Mover/Second: not specified in the public audio record for that motion; roll call followed. - Vote: same roll call; Tally: 7 yes, 0 no. Outcome: approved (meeting adjourned to executive session at 6:21 p.m.).

What the board did not do

Board members approved the reductions as presented and did not postpone final action. Administrators and some speakers noted the board had previously discussed deficit planning in the fall and during referendum-related outreach; however, several public commenters asked the board to delay action to allow more community input.

Next steps and implementation

Administrators said they will finalize placements where possible and return to the board with follow-up items. Dr. Flagg and other administrators indicated they plan to bring an academic-minute planning proposal back to the board in May to address reduced teacher prep and to adjust schedules across K–12 to protect instructional minutes and build in snow-day contingencies. The board must adopt a preliminary budget by June to set tax levies and have authority for spending in the 2025–26 fiscal year.

The board's actions are contingent on state funding, possible future referenda and enrollment trends; administrators repeatedly noted that legislative changes or delayed state aid remain an uncertainty that could affect future budget decisions.