Whitnall staff propose six-month trial of autonomous floor scrubber to offset custodial workload

A facilities staff member told the Whitnall School District Board of Education they are seeking permission to test an autonomous floor scrubber at Whitnall High School for six months and, if satisfied, purchase additional units for other buildings. The staff member said the vendor is NASCO and estimated the autonomous unit at roughly $50,000; by contrast, a new conventional riding scrubber was presented at about $32,750.

"It cleans on its own. It's like a self driving car. It has 32 sensors that guide it through the cleaning map that we establish," the facilities staff member said, summarizing a recent demonstration at the high school and at a custodial conference. Staff described features including onboard mapping, a docking station that fills the machine with cleaning solution, automated dirty-water disposal and charging, and the ability to learn more efficient routes over time.

Why it matters: District officials said the scrubber would not be used to eliminate positions but to offset custodial time spent on repetitive tasks, help cover gaps when staff are absent, and reduce the incremental staffing needed to maintain larger buildings created by the district's referendum construction. The business manager noted potential budget implications and asked whether referendum funds might be eligible; staff said they would check with auditors.

Operational details and staff responses - Intended use: daily lunch cleanup in cafeterias, high-traffic hallways during peak times, nightly cleaning of gyms, multipurpose rooms and hallways. At the high school the presenter said cafeteria floor scrubs take about 45 minutes to an hour each day by current practice. - Charging and runtime: Staff reported a full charge takes about 4 to 5 hours and the vendor estimates up to a 5-hour runtime per charge. - Deployment plan: Staff proposed starting at the high school and testing one unit for six months; they suggested a second unit for the high school may be warranted because the machine does not ride elevators on its own and upper-floor operations would require staff assistance. - Safety and durability questions: Board members asked about the pool deck and edges; staff relayed vendor guidance that the machine identifies cliffs (pool edges/stairs) during mapping and that districts interviewed had not experienced those failures. Staff also described that initial deployments would be monitored by custodians when students are present and that the machine stops and reroutes if it encounters people or obstacles. - Vendor experience: Staff cited other Wisconsin schools and several universities using similar units, including Arrowhead High School and Hartford High School, which staff said purchased one unit and later sought a second.

Costs and budget considerations The presenter provided a multi-year comparative cost example based on a 10-year life cycle, arguing that labor savings from not having staff drive scrubbers could justify the higher upfront price over time. Staff said software updates and vendor technical support are provided through NASCO, and that routine mechanical maintenance is comparable to conventional riding scrubbers. The docking station requires custodial-level tasks such as refilling cleaning solution. The staff member said unit service and parts are available locally through NASCO in New Berlin.

Board questions and next steps Board members raised concerns about tampering, app security and scheduling around after-school events. Staff said programming can be scheduled to avoid event times, that the app would be limited to district custodial phones and that cameras on the machine record its operation. The board did not take a vote; staff asked for approval to proceed with a six-month trial and said they would return with procurement details and answers about potential use of referendum funds for part of the cost.

Ending Board members asked staff to check auditor guidance on capital-fund eligibility and to return with procurement recommendations. No formal motion or vote was recorded on the proposed trial during the meeting.