Luxemburg-Casco electors authorize proposed 2025-26 levy; board approves budget amid aid losses and rising costs

Luxemburg-Casco School District electors on Oct. 22, 2025, voted to authorize a tax levy to fund the 2025-26 school-year budget and approved a series of routine governance resolutions. District presenters told electors the proposed total tax levy for 2025-26 is $13,017,909 and outlined the district's revenue limit, fund balances and major cost drivers.

The presenter said the district's projected revenue limit for 2025-26 is roughly $23,092,000. Enrollment for the third-Friday count was 2,044 students (this figure includes open-enrollment and virtual students); resident membership used in the revenue-limit formula was reported at 1,770. The district reported 315 open-enrollment students transferring in and 68 transferring out. The general-education transfer amount cited for open-enrolled pupils was $10,102 per pupil; the special-education transfer was cited at $14,454.

Officials said the district lost about $698,000 in equalization aid this year. The presenter attributed part of that loss to a statewide redistribution of roughly $350,000,000 to voucher schools and noted that 71% of districts in the state lost aid this year. The district's presenters warned that the reduced aid pot and rising local costs were material factors in the budget outlook.

On taxation and mill rate, presenters said equalized property values rose about 9.08% this year. They explained the mill rate is calculated by dividing the total levy by equalized value and multiplying by 1,000; under the proposed levy the presented mill rate is $6.62 per $1,000 of assessed value, an $0.11 increase from last year's $6.51, which the presenter said would equal $663 on a $100,000 home under the proposal.

Fund-level highlights in the budget materials included:

- Fund 10 (general operations): State aid and property taxes comprise the majority of revenues; salaries and benefits represent the largest share of expenditures. Presenters stated that combined salaries and benefits across Fund 10 and Fund 27 represent about 80% of the district's personnel-related spending.

- Fund 27 (special education): The presenter reported Fund 27 revenues near $4,365,000 and noted the fund must be balanced; transfers from Fund 10 are required to cover costs not reimbursed by state categorical aid. District staff said they budgeted conservatively for state reimbursement (about 40% in their assumption).

- Fund 50 (food service): The fund began the prior year with about $236,000, spent down roughly $161,000 during the year and had an ending balance near $75,000. Rising food costs (presenter cited ~40% increases) and salary pressures prompted a proposed $75,000 transfer from Fund 10 in the proposed budget.

- Debt and capital: The district reported the Honeywell energy-efficiency project debt was paid off in March 2025. The presenter identified a remaining non-referendum obligation associated with the Nexus 1 project with approximately $8,000,000 left to pay, and reported referendum-approved debt outstanding near $25,900,000.

- Fund 80 (community services): The presenter proposed a Fund 80 levy of $300,000 (stated to have about a one-cent effect on the mill rate) to slow the decline of that fund; presenters noted the county police liaison contract had increased, contributing to the cost pressure.

During the annual meeting, electors moved and seconded multiple resolutions. Actions recorded in the meeting transcript and approved by voice vote (exact tallies were not recorded in the transcript) included:

- Authorize a tax levy of $13,017,909 for 2025-26 (motion moved and seconded; approved by voice vote; exact tally not specified in the transcript).

- Authorize borrowing as needed to meet immediate expenses of the district (approved by voice vote).

- Adopt board member salaries: President, Treasurer and Clerk at $2,750; Vice President and other board members at $2,500 (approved by voice vote).

- Authorize reimbursement of board members for actual and necessary travel expenses (approved by voice vote).

- Authorize hiring attorneys and paying necessary legal fees (approved by voice vote).

- Authorize the board to furnish textbooks (approved by voice vote).

- Authorize the board to furnish school lunches and appropriate funds for that purpose (approved by voice vote).

- Set the next annual meeting for Oct. 26, 2026, at 7 p.m. (approved by voice vote).

Later the board convened a special board meeting. The board approved the 2025-26 budgets and moved to approve the total tax levy by voice vote. The transcript contains an inconsistent spoken figure during the board discussion: the levy previously read aloud to electors as $13,017,909, and later in the special meeting a different figure of $15,017,909 was read aloud when the board clerk read the fund-levy line. That discrepancy is apparent in the transcript and will require verification against the district's official signed minutes and levy certification documents to determine the final adopted levy amount.

The meeting record shows a number of budget drivers that district presenters emphasized: rising property values and changing equalization aid distributions, increasing food and personnel costs, special-education reimbursement uncertainty, and remaining referendum debt service. Presenters noted the district ended 2024-25 with a fund balance above the policy target (30.44% vs. a 25–30% policy band) but earmarked portions of that balance for referendum shortfalls and other obligations.

Votes at the annual meeting and the board's subsequent approval were taken by voice vote; the transcript records "ayes" but does not provide roll-call tallies. The transcript also records the absence of two board members from the special board meeting (Robin Richard and Linda John) and lists administrative staff Jewel Allen and Rebecca as present.

Officials and staff who spoke in the materials provided budget figures and policy context; the transcript attributes many remarks to an unidentified presenter (staff member) and to the chairperson during the meeting. The transcript contains some inconsistent or unclear phrasings (see audit notes). For any formal fiscal or levy certification, readers should consult the district's official minutes and levy certification filed with Kewaunee County for the final adopted levy amount and corresponding mill rate calculations.