Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Referendum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kenosha speakers sharply divided over Feb. 18 operational referendum at school board meeting
Summary
Public comment at the Kenosha Unified School District board meeting featured sharply divided views on the Feb. 18 operational referendum, with speakers alternately urging a 'yes' vote to shore up school funding and a 'no' vote citing administrative bloat, unclear ESSER accounting and safety concerns.
Dozens of residents told the Kenosha Unified School District board on Monday that the Feb. 18 operational referendum will determine whether the district can keep programs, staff and building security or should instead shrink administration and better account for previous federal dollars.
The public-comment period, which lasted about 45 minutes and included 11 speakers, featured repeated appeals both for and against the ballot question that will appear in February. Supporters said the referendum is needed to maintain teachers, programs and building safety; opponents accused the district of fiscal mismanagement and questioned how prior ESSER funds were spent.
“By tabling the proposed changes to policy 67100, you have acted in the best interest of student safety,” said Caleb Laytonen, who identified himself as a Kenosha resident, and argued he would vote against the referendum and incumbents he holds responsible for district management. “76% of a budget going towards salaries means that less than a quarter go towards students or facilities.”
Several speakers cited state funding limits, declining enrollment and the expiration of federal relief dollars as the fiscal backdrop. Jody Mierhoff, a parent and speaker advocating a yes vote, said state reimbursement for special education leaves large local gaps and that local referenda have become a common response across Wisconsin.
Opponents raised questions about ESSER spending and administrative head count. Angela Kretchmer said KUSD received about $72,000,000 in ESSER funds and asserted that roughly $67,000,000 of those funds were not accounted for; Valerie Kretchmer echoed concerns about transparency and mailers and billboards supporting the referendum. The district’s chief financial officer presented ESSER accounting at earlier sessions, according to public speakers; the board did not provide additional fiscal detail during public comment.
Supporters including Ruth Bradford Johnson and Robin Cullen urged passage to retain teachers, preserve programs and protect property values. “Strong schools directly contribute to strong communities,” Cullen said, adding that voter investments protect children and neighborhood stability.
Board members noted the referendum’s placement on a typically low-turnout primary day, and the district reminded the public of two upcoming community town halls on the referendum: January 20 at 10:30 a.m. at the ESC and February 4 at 5:30 p.m. at Lance Middle School.
The board did not take action on the referendum during public comment; the discussion will continue as the district moves toward the February election.
