Howard‑Suamico superintendent outlines $7M operational proposal and $147M facilities plan ahead of spring referendum

Superintendent Mark Smith of the Howard‑Suamico School District presented the district's proposed two-question spring 2026 referendum to the Suamico Village Board, saying the proposals are the product of extensive community engagement and are intended to preserve programming and address building capacity constraints.

Smith, who identified himself as a Suamico resident and district superintendent, told trustees the district held more than 130 listening sessions and a 12‑hour community event that informed the referendum questions. "We arrived at this through what we felt like was really dedicated community involvement," Smith said, adding that the packet on the board meeting lists conceptual plans and budget estimates but no final architectural drawings.

The referendum contains two separate questions. The operational question would allow the district to increase its revenue limit by $7 million for seven years to support student programming, smaller class sizes and staff compensation; Smith said the district has passed operational referendums in 2018 and 2021. The facilities question would authorize borrowing not to exceed $147 million to fund renovations and improvements across six of the district's eight schools; Smith said Bay View and Forest Glenn are excluded because they were substantially renovated as part of the 2021 facilities referendum.

Trustees pressed the district on program specifics and tax implications. In response to a question about career and technical education, Smith said Bay Port High School would focus on expanding modern manufacturing, welding, woodworking, robotics, culinary arts, agricultural science and business pathways where space constraints currently limit offerings. On funding, Smith described the district's goal of a tax‑rate neutral approach but cautioned there is no guarantee an individual homeowner's tax bill will remain unchanged: "Property values change and we can't promise taxes won't go up," he said.

Trustee Eckert and others questioned the scale of the facilities package. Smith said the $147 million figure continues the district's long‑term facilities planning following the $98 million package in 2021 and that the board sought to limit scope where the community objected (for example removing an indoor athletic facility from the current proposal). Smith also described partnerships with local employers to support workforce training; he said the district's youth apprenticeship and work‑experience programs have grown from about a dozen students to more than 100.

Board members asked whether the district will continue to press state legislators for funding parity. Smith said the district plans legislative outreach (including a March 9 community conversation) and argued that state funding levels have not kept pace with inflation and rising costs for special education and other mandates.

The referendum will appear on the spring general election ballot; the district and board will continue public information and outreach before voters decide.