Fort Atkinson projects roughly $2.2 million deficit for 2026–27 as referendum revenues phase out
Loading...
Summary
District finance staff told the school board an early budget projection shows an approximately $2.2 million operating deficit in 2026–27 after a three‑year operational referendum expires, driven by rising property values, declining enrollment and modeled assumptions for wages and benefits.
Fort Atkinson School District finance staff warned the board that the district could face an operating shortfall of about $2.2 million in the 2026–27 fiscal year after a three‑year operational referendum expires.
"Projections are a snapshot as of the information we have today and they are not a guarantee of the future," said Mr. Knitt, the district's director of business services, who presented the multi‑year budget model and assumptions to the board.
Why it matters: The model combines enrollment forecasts, property‑value trends and several fixed assumptions. Staff told the board that Fort Atkinson's enrollment is forecast to decline in coming years while property values in the district have recently been rising faster than the state average. Because Wisconsin's equalization aid is sensitive to the district's property‑value‑per‑member ratio, higher property values paired with declining enrollment reduce equalization aid and shift more costs to local taxpayers.
Assumptions and figures: The projection includes a $325 per‑member increase under the revenue limit (currently assumed in the state budget), a 4% wage increase budgeted for 2026–27 (with 3% placeholders in later years), a 12% annual increase for health insurance in the model, and additional annual increases for utilities, transportation and other insurance. Mr. Knitt said that under those assumptions the district is projected to be "about $2,200,000 in the red" for 2026–27. He showed a modeled scenario in which, without the referendum's $6.5 million of recurring revenue, deficits grow in subsequent years (an illustrative shortfall of roughly $4.2 million in 2027–28 was shown in the presentation).
Board reaction and next steps: Board members stressed the compounding effect of annual percentage increases and the need to examine rightsizing options such as staff adjustments and program structure as enrollment changes. Staff emphasized these are planning projections intended to inform future discussions; no policy decision was made at the meeting. Mr. Knitt asked the board to confirm whether current strategies (market/CPI adjustments and rightsizing) remain the district's priorities and said administration will return with further analysis in coming months.
The presentation and board discussion are part of a multi‑month process; staff noted the results of a recent population study and a PRA facilities update will be used in future budget deliberations.
