Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget committee to bring lower tax-levy proposal to full board, using $2 million in fund equity
Summary
At its Oct. 6 meeting the Waunakee Community School District budget committee agreed to present a tax-levy option at a special board meeting that relies on $2 million of Fund 39 equity to cover 2026 debt-service payments and buys time to decide on possible refinancing or other uses of referendum savings.
Get email alerts on the Tax Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Waunakee Community School District Budget Committee agreed Oct. 6 to present a tax-levy proposal at a special board meeting at the end of October that uses $2 million in Fund 39 equity to reduce the levy the district will set this fall.
The committee’s business manager said bond counsel Quarles & Brady recommended “make it clear that we’re utilizing $2,000,000 in Fund 39 fund equity in order to meet the April 1, debt service payments,” because the board would be approving a levy in October that must legally cover all of 2026 debt-service payments even though any refinancing decision could come later.
That guidance, the manager said, allows the district to present a levy in October that looks like the second draft of the budget (about a 6 percent increase in the earlier draft) while giving the board months to decide whether to refinance outstanding debt, use additional referendum savings or rely on interest earnings.
Why it matters: the levy the board certifies this fall determines property-tax revenue for 2026 and must legally cover debt-service obligations for that year. Using fund equity now relieves immediate cash-flow pressure but reduces the balance available for future years or other one-time capital decisions.
Committee and staff discussion
The committee discussed four modeling options that mix referendum savings, interest earnings and varying levels of Fund 39 equity; staff said there is “plenty of time” to finalize any refinancing and that any refinancing need not occur by April 1 or June 30. The presentation noted an example Fund 39 balance of $5,800,000 and emphasized that bond counsel recommended showing $2,000,000 of that as applied to 2026 debt service.
Board members and staff also tied the timing decision to upcoming facilities choices. The business manager said, “the way that we choose to go with 4 ks will have a huge effect … on future equalization aid payments from the state and tax levies,” and that decisions about high-school campus work—athletic facilities, music-suite renovations or other projects—would change how much remaining equity the district has for debt service.
No final refinancing decision was made. Staff said they will present the levy at a special board meeting (noted as Thursday the 30th) after the state provides final equalized values on Oct. 15, then continue to analyze refinancing and other options during 2026.
Quotes from meeting participants
Rebecca (staff member) summarized counsel’s recommendation: “make it clear that we’re utilizing $2,000,000 in Fund 39 fund equity in order to meet the April 1, debt service payments.”
The committee’s business manager added that the approach “gives you more time” to weigh facility choices and refinancing options.
Next steps and context
Staff will finalize budgets after Oct. 15 and present the levy options at the special board meeting at the end of October. The committee asked staff to prepare scenario analyses (several options) so the board can decide whether to refinance one or two years of debt or pursue other combinations of equity and savings.
Votes at the meeting
The only recorded formal votes in the transcript were procedural: approval of the agenda and adjournment. The budget and levy presentation was a staff direction and planning item; no formal levy motion or refinancing vote appears in the transcript.
Ending
Staff said it will return refined levy scenarios and related financial modeling to the board after the district receives the Oct. 15 equalized-value data and following further analysis of referendum savings, potential refinancing and facility-cost choices.

