Silver Lake J1 school leaders outline preliminary budget assumptions; staff changes and fund transfers would ease special-ed pressure

Silver Lake J1 School District officials used a public budget workshop to review multi-year revenue trends, the district’s fund structure and preliminary assumptions for the 2026–27 budget, and then moved into closed session to discuss pay.

Presenter (identified in the transcript as the meeting’s lead) opened the session by introducing Tim Stellmacher, the district’s budget consultant, and said the workshop’s goals were to “learn the history of budgeting from ’93 to the current year,” review staffing and enrollment trends and examine how the Baird forecast model informs future budgets. Tim Stellmacher explained the district’s major funds and how they interact with the state revenue limit: “Fund 27, special education … every district in the state of Wisconsin has more expenses in Fund 27 than they do revenues,” he said.

Why it matters: the district must balance constrained state revenue-limit rules and rising costs. Presenters showed that Silver Lake’s per-FTE revenue figure is near the state average but that special-education staffing (about 28.8% of staff vs. 14.3% of students) produces outsized Fund 27 costs. School leaders said that, under current assumptions and planned staffing adjustments, the transfer from Fund 10 to Fund 27 would fall from roughly $868,000 to about $587,000.

Key budget assumptions and projections presented - Salary increase: a preliminary modeling assumption of 3% (with the Consumer Price Index cited at 2.63%); presenters noted that bargaining units can limit increases to CPI when bargaining is active. "Salary increase is 3%," Tim Stellmacher said. - Health insurance: the modeling uses a conservative 20% increase assumption for gold-level coverage to avoid underestimating costs. - Retirement: the employer contribution to the Wisconsin Retirement System was modeled at 7.2% beginning Jan. 1, 2026. - Forecasting tool: presenters fed district Skyward data into the Baird forecast model to project revenues and to surface outliers; the model returned a revenue projection cited at about $6,000,004.92 while district internal figures were higher in preliminary work.

Staffing and personnel moves Presenter (S1) said five special-education educational-assistant (EA) positions will be eliminated through resignations and restructuring; one position had already been vacated. Of the five departures discussed, three were certified teachers the district expects to reassign to other vacancies. The presenter said the board will vote on those resignations at the next public meeting and believes the departures qualify as exceptions to maintenance-of-effort rules that otherwise restrict reductions in special-education spending. "Of the 5, we're really losing just 1," the presenter said while explaining the net staffing impact.

Special-education funding and reimbursements Officials described multiple revenue sources that can offset high-cost placements: categorical special-education aid, high-cost reimbursement and transfer-of-service payments. Tim Stellmacher cautioned that state promises of higher reimbursement do not automatically translate to full local reimbursement because the statewide pot and claims from many districts affect final percentages.

Enrollment, FTE and open enrollment Officials reviewed membership (FTE) calculations and noted that open-enrolled students affect district revenue but generally do not increase the revenue limit (three-year resident-FTE averaging smooths sudden enrollment changes). The presenters discussed strategies to increase resident summer-school participation and other enrollment levers.

Other items and next steps Presenters described talent-recruitment ideas (internships, youth-apprenticeship pipelines and university partnerships) to address long-term staffing needs. The workshop concluded with a motion to adjourn into closed session to discuss pay and contract particulars; the motion was approved by voice vote and the board began closing procedures. The presenter said the board aims to place the preliminary budget and any salary increases on the consent/approval agenda at the next board meeting and then proceed with required contract paperwork.

What remains uncertain: presenters repeatedly framed many line items as assumptions for a preliminary budget (insurance increase, actual reimbursement percentages, and whether some transfers or high-cost placements will occur). Several figures were presented as projections or illustrative estimates rather than final commitments.