Over the last 24 months, Gillett School District Administration and School Board have taken thoughtful and intentional steps to restore the District’s financial situation and develop a comprehensive, long-term plan to protect our community’s assets. The last year of planning, development and community engagement have included:

• Developing a community-based Strategic Plan to provide a future-focused roadmap for student success.

• Completing a comprehensive facilities audit to identify and prioritize our District’s facility challenges.

• Surveying community members to gather feedback and prioritize potential solutions.

• Reviewing facility study data and community survey data to help determine fiscally-responsible next steps. 

• Reviewed staffing levels and compensation comparisons

• Implemented $695,000 in efficiencies and cuts

All of this careful and collaborative work helped inform the School Board’s final decision to pursue an operational referendum on November 3, 2026.

• Shall the Gillett School District, Oconto and Shawano Counties, Wisconsin, be authorized to exceed the revenue limit specified in Section 121.91, of the Wisconsin Statutes, by $1,900,000 in each year for the 2026-2027, the 2027-2028, and the 2028-2029 school years,, for non-recurring purposes, to sustain student educational programming, operations, and facilities maintenance?

For the most fiscally-responsible approach, the Board studied costs over three years and proposed a phased approach, over the next three years, to address: 

• Student Programming: maintain current programming, manage class sizes and staff-to-student ratios while providing competitive opportunities for our students to keep them in our district.

• Utilities and General Supplies: keep up with increasing costs in utilities and general supplies.

• Staff Salaries & Benefits: retain and attract quality teachers and support staff by bringing compensation up to the area AVERAGE.

• School Operations: sustain core operational and maintenance funds as we work to stabilize our District’s financial situation.

This referendum proposes a three-year increase of funding by $1.9 million dollars per year. 

• In the first year, with a projected year one increase of $13.67 per month, per $100,000 of property value compared to the 2025-2026 school year. 

• Year two would see this decrease to a projected increase of $3.42 per month, per $100,000 of property value compared to the 2025-2026 school year. 

• Year three would see this decrease to a projected decrease of $0.50 per month, per $100,000 of property value compared to the 2025-2026 school year. 

Future Projections

• The levy is projected to go down each year after the first year of the referendum and we would still have the lowest projected levy compared to all of our neighbors.

• Gillett will pay off it’s remaining debt after the 2026-2027 school year. The money saved from this will automatically go back to taxpayers. 

• While there is a projected surplus in Year One, there would be projected deficits in Year Two and Three, with a net impact on fund balance of +$16,700.

Gillett is a positively aided school district, which means:

• The more money the district spends, the more aid it receives from the state.

• This spending could include putting money info Fund 46, which is a fund set aside for future building projects and repairs. 

This referendum better positions us to capitalize on being a positively aided district while also taking advantage of better ways of investing our fund balance that should allow us to lower taxes even further by the time the district needs to go back to referendum. 

The amount of revenue a district can raise from state aid and local property taxes is restricted by state statutes. This restriction has been in existence since 1993 and Gillett has been a low revenue district since that time.

• Wisconsin’s School funding formula has not kept pace with inflation, which means even maintaining the current level of services has required the Gillett School District to operate at a deficit over the past two years.

• This is a statewide funding challenge causing Gillett and districts all across the state to seek community approval for operational referendums to increase funding.

• Our fund balance is projected to be nearly depleted at the end of the 2026-27 school year and community approval is needed for a revenue increase to maintain current staffing, programming, and class sizes. 

• The District has been operating at a deficit and drawing down its fund balance to levels that may require short term borrowing to cover basic operational costs. At the same time, Gillett is the lowest compensated district in the region for salary and benefits, making it increasingly difficult to attract and retain qualified staff.

• Our fund balance is projected to be nearly depleted at the end of the 2026-27 school year and community approval is needed for a revenue increase to maintain current staffing, programming, and class sizes.

Based on projections, we would either need to cut staff, programs, or some combination of both.

We would continue to face the ramifications of having the lowest compensated staff in the region and one of the lowest in the state.

Increasing class sizes and/or cutting elective programing such as agriculture, industrial arts, music, and art would be very hard on our students and our staff — and the possibility of not being able to staff our buildings is a real concern. 

More and more districts around the state are facing a similar problem as Gillett. More and more districts are discussing the real possibility that their local district could close. While this is the last option our school board wants to consider, it is a very real situation we could need to consider. 

If district closure were to occur, students would be required to attend schools in neighboring communities and local taxpayers would take on the taxes of those school districts, who currently are projected to have higher tax levys than the Gillett School District would haven, even if the current referendum were to pass. 

For more information on school district dissolution vist: Dissolution of a School District | Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

• The public school funding model Wisconsin established in 1993 was designed to empower local voters to decide how to fund their district rather than automatically keeping pace with increasing costs through state funding and automatic tax levy increases. 

• Since then, education funding from the State Legislature has not kept pace with inflation, causing school districts across Wisconsin to navigate serious funding issues. The gap between rising costs and insufficient state funding is necessitating more districts to turn to voters to maintain operations and meet capital needs.

• In the last two years, 170 of Wisconsin’s 421 Districts turned to referendums to maintain operations—that’s 40% of all districts.

• Since 2010, only 19 of Wisconsin’s 421 school districts have not asked voters to consider an operational or debt referendum.

• An OPERATIONAL referendum asks voters to approve additional funding above the annual revenue limit to maintain things like class sizes, programs, staff compensation and student services. Funds secured are intended to be used within the year(s) they are received.   

• A CAPITAL(BOND) referendum asks voters to approve the district issuing debt to pay for major building projects, such as maintenance, remodeling or additions to school buildings. Much like a home mortgage, a facility (bond) referendum is typically financed over an extended period of time, often 20 years. 

• 2022: Voters approved a three-year, $600,000 per year non-recurring referendum.

• 2018: Voters also approved a three-year, $600,000 per year non-recurring referendum.

• Both approvals were for temporary funding to support school operations—not permanent increases.

The District has taken a thoughtful, step-by-step approach to planning for the future. After developing a strategic plan focused on student success, responsible operations, and long-term stability, our priority is getting the operational budget in order so day-to-day needs—such as staffing and programming—are addressed responsibly.

Looking to the future:

• The district has partnered with CESA 8 to begin implementing a strategy which could help to lower taxes in the future with the help of this referendum. Because Gillett is a positively aided district, spending referendum money correctly will give us greater state aid, which currently projects to give us the ability to lower taxes each of the last two years of this referendum and could set the district up to lower taxes even further in future years.

• It is also likely that the District will need to address long-term facility needs. When that time comes, it may require a bond or facility referendum and the District is committed to open communication, transparency, and community involvement.

Election day voting is November 3, 2026.

• Polls are open from 7 am to 8 pm 

• Polling places can be found here

If you have any questions about your polling place, voter registration, or early in-person and absentee voting please visit MyVote.wi.gov for more information.

• The district is working with Robert W. Baird and Co. to ensure that we have an accurate forecast of revenue and expenses. They are providing us with comprehensive financial data to determine the full extent of the budget deficit, to advise on spending without impacting student experiences, and to seek additional revenue opportunities. The district also remains in contact with its legal and fiscal counsel on all relevant matters.

• The district has also partnered with CESA 8 to begin implementing a strategy to help lower taxes in the future.

Over the past several years, the Gillett School District has taken meaningful steps to manage its finances responsibly. The District has already reduced expenses through staffing reductions, limiting curriculum and technology updates, reducing supply purchasing, and deferring maintenance where possible. These reductions were implemented to slow the growth of budget shortfalls while minimizing the impact on students.

Since the beginning of 2026, the District has also reduced administrative costs, while continuing to support behavioral needs of our students, by replacing the administrative Dean of Students position with a behavioral interventionist teaching position. However, despite these efforts, existing revenues are not sufficient to maintain current programs and services without additional support.

Finally, policies and procedures have been updated to provide clearer and more consistent financial reporting to the School Board and the community to ensure transparency. This includes working with CESA 8 to provide external checks and balances on our finances, along with finding better ways to earn more state aid. Gillett School District’s 2025 Annual Reports can be reviewed here.

The School Board has been studying this issue for the past two years. The School Board considered a number of scenarios and decided on this plan – spreading the cost of increasing salary and benefits to the average in our region over the last two years of a three year referendum.

• With voter approval of the referendum, projected revenues would cover expenses over the three years of the referendum, with year one seeing a surplus that would cover deficits in years two and three.

• Without the referendum, even with the same compensation adjustments, expenses exceed revenues every year, resulting in growing annual deficits.

CLICK TO VIEW THE PROJECTED BUDGET:

Based on Baird’s projections the cost to catch staff up will be $1.2 million over three years. 

Baird used statewide data and an Oconto County wage study to generate the numbers for our projections. This data will be used to look at each individual salary in our district to catch those wages up with the average in the state.

After this our goal is to maintain our compensation, looking at a combination of wages and benefits, to ensure our staff falls between the 40th and 60th percentile over the next five years, so that we never fall to a place where we struggle to attract and retain quality staff. This is key goal identified in our community-based, strategic plan. 

CLICK TO VIEW HOW THE MONEY WILL BE SPENT:

The plan includes investing $1.2 million in buildings/grounds maintenance and repairs, with the goal of saving towards larger projects such as HVAC, our parking lot, and elementary school upgrades. The remaining money will be used to maintain programs and utilities. 

A large goal for this referendum is to manage our money to leverage ways to increase our revenue – particularly through state aid.

If there were a major change in our revenue or expenses that were to lead to our projections being incorrect, the school board would decide what to do with the extra money. The board could choose to levy less money, the board could decide to put this money into fund balance to ensure we do not need to short term borrow and pay interest, or the board could put the money into Fund 46, which is a fund that can only be used for improvements to our buildings and grounds maintenance and projects. 

If the Gillett School District dissolves, residents would still pay school taxes, they would just go to the new district in which residents are assigned. This includes taking on their referendum taxes and debt.

Surrounding districts have passed larger referendums than Gillett, and absorbing Gillett students would likely require them to raise taxes to accommodate new students. As a result, your taxes would most likely increase if Gillett School District were to dissolve.

In Gillett, the Dean of Students has been an administrative position that generally works in the realm of student discipline. The Behavioral Interventionist is a teaching position whose focus is on teaching students and working with classroom to help students control their behavior.

A team of community members, staff, and administrators met to review curriculum to help address behavior issues and will be implementing this curriculum starting this school year. While the school board cut the administrative dean of students position, it has hired a teaching position of behavioral interventionist for the district at a cost savings of approximately $40,000. 

The key difference with this position change is that the behavioral interventionists focus will be on proactively managing student behaviors. This includes working in classrooms with staff on ways to support teaching and student development. This work will take time, but the goal is to reduce the number of negative behaviors among students over the long term.

27. How does the projected mill rate compare with mill rates in the past?

If the referendum were to pass, it would return to a mill rate comparable to 2006, which was $8.31. The projected mill rate if the referendum were to pass would be $8.12. The mill rate in 2020 was $9.72 and reached $10.37 in 2013. The most recent comparable mill rate was 2021 when the mill rate was $8.64.

The District’s goal is to stabilize the mill rate over time while also lowering our levy by maximizing state aid. By ensuring our schools are properly funded and facilities remain safe and functional, we also can maintain our costs over time. A more predictable approach helps avoid sharp spikes and supports responsible financial planning.

Student-to-staff ratios often seem artificially low because they are calculated by dividing the total number of students by the total number of staff, including non-classroom educators like specialists, counselors, special education teachers, and administrators, rather than just classroom teachers. This statistical average obscures the reality of classrooms. To see how Gillett’s numbers compare to other schools our size in our area, please see the annual meeting information. Our district lands in the average range for all positions. 

Baird currently works with 375 of 421 Wisconsin School Districts in some sort of financial capacity. They also work with school districts around the nation. 

Yes, additional informational meetings are scheduled with local village boards and city councils. Dates and locations can be found here.

Please reach out if your organization would like to schedule a presentation.

The short answer is no, the tax rates on farmland or forests aren't the reason the school district might be struggling financially, but they do affect how the tax bill is shared among neighbors.

Here is a breakdown of how it works:

• The State Sets the "Cap": Since 1993, the state has put a limit (called a Revenue Limit) on how much total money a school district can collect from state aid and local taxes combined. For a long time, this limit hasn't kept up with the rising costs of things like heating, fuel for buses, and insurance.

• The "Pie" Analogy: Think of the school’s budget as a pie. The size of that pie is determined by the state. The school district doesn't get a bigger pie just because property values go up; they are stuck with the size the state allows.

• Tax Shifts (The Burden): This is where crop land and managed forests come in. To support agriculture and conservation, the state mandates these lands be taxed at a lower value.

  • Because the school still needs to collect its "pie," the portion of the bill that isn't paid by those lands gets shifted to other property owners (like residential homeowners or businesses).

  • The Result: Other taxpayers might see their bills go up to cover the difference, but the school district itself doesn't actually get any extra money.

Gillett isn't alone. Most school districts in Wisconsin have had to ask voters for more funding (a referendum) because the state-imposed "pie size" hasn't grown at the same rate as inflation. When the state funding doesn't cover the gap, the law requires the district to ask the local community to exceed those limits.

The resolution wording can be found on the Voting Information page of our website under the section titled “What’s on the ballot?”.

You should use your Assessed Value. It is very common for these two numbers to be different, and using the wrong one can lead to an inaccurate estimate of your taxes. Here is the breakdown:

• Appraised (Market) Value: This is an estimate of what your home would sell for on the open market today. It fluctuates based on real estate trends and what buyers are willing to pay.

• Assessed Value: This is the value placed on your property by the local municipality specifically for taxation purposes. In many areas, the assessed value is a percentage of the market value and is often considerably lower.

The referendum tax rate is applied to the assessed value of your property. If you calculate your impact using your market appraisal, you will likely arrive at a total that is much higher than what you would actually pay.

You can find your property’s current assessed value on your most recent property tax bill, by visiting your county’s website, or by contacting your local municipality for more information.

If approved, the referendum would result in a year one mill rate comparable to the 2021 mill rate of $8.97 and the remaining years would see the following increases:

CLICK TO VIEW PROJECTED MILL RATE:

This past year’s average mill rate is $6.48, which equals $54 per month per $100,000 in assessed value.

Click to view enrollment data provided by Baird

The district has partnered with Baird six of the past ten years for our school district’s budget projections, and plan to continue working with them for long‑term financial planning support. This year’s cost was $7,000, which includes five‑year budget projections, a data analytics tool, and ongoing support.

Educational funding is always a hot topic. If funding, such as special education funding, were to increase, the district would have more revenue. If the state were to chose to increase aid for property taxes, property tax owners would see a lowering of their tax bills. All of our projections are based on the current state of educational funding in WI with educated estimates made by Baird on likely increases school districts would normally see. That said, the decision by the state this past year to not provide aid to property tax owners was something that had not occurred in many years, so there is no way to predict what the state will do every year with 100% certainty. 

If the school district were to receive more revenue, the board could choose to lower the needed levy, put the money into fund balance to try to prevent short term borrowing, or move the money into fund 46, which would be used on maintenance and building projects.  

The lawsuit is predicted to take years to come to completion. If the school district were to receive more money because of the lawsuit, the board would need to decide if they wanted to lower the levy, put the money into fund balance to try to prevent the need for short term borrowing, or put the money into fund 46 for maintenance and repairs.

Any student who moves within the boundaries of the Gillett School District is entitled to attend school in Gillett. Currently we have an open enrollment cap on special education students because of the cost and capacity of our system.

For 2026-27: 

• Gas for Heat, 60% increase

• Electricity (other than heat), 7% decrease

• Water, 100% increase 

• Sewer, 1% increase

For future years:

• There is a 10% increase each year for gas and electricity and 15% for water and sewerage.

• For maintenance and repairs there is a projected increase of 25% next year and 5% each year after that. 

No, the last referendum did not go to staff salaries. Due to our budget deficit the money was used to maintain basic school operations.

According to data provided by Baird, our District has the second highest percentage of special education students (25.3%) in CESA 8 and is the 9th lowest in Special Education spending (Fund 27) when compared to the rest of CESA 8. 

The Gillett School District spent $2,105,365 out of Fund 27 during the 2024-2025 school year – which is below the state average. These costs are just special education related costs, and do not include the cost of building maintenance, non-special education supplies, etc.

View Special Education Expenditures - Neighboring District Comparison

While we have the highest percentage of Special Education Students of our neighbors, we also spend the least per pupil.

Before asking for more, the board made difficult structural cuts and changes, which saved over $695,000 over the past two school years by maximizing every dollar: 

• Staffing Restructuring (~$260,000 Saved): Cut a 4K teaching position ($80,000); reduced a full-time custodian to part-time ($50,000); replaced the Dean of Students with a behavioral interventionist ($40,000); and reduced two paraprofessional positions over two years ($90,000).

  NOTE: Gillett School District staff are currently the lowest-paid in our region across all categories (certified, non-certified, and administration).

• Operations & Benefits (Over $230,000 Saved): Changed staff insurance plans (Over $90,000); cut non-required college credit courses ($40,000); and transitioning the 3K program to a parent-funded model starting midyear 2026-2027 ($100,000).

• Grants & Efficiencies (Over $205,000 Saved): Reorganized the budget to maximize state special education funding ($65,000); reduced OT/PT support staff ($100,000); and secured a grant for a district van to cut daily bussing costs ($40,000).

• Resourcefulness: Partnered with Bonduel School District for a shared Physical Therapist, partnered with NWTC for free/used technology resources, reduced administrative contracts, and streamlined bulk custodial ordering.

45 teachers, including full-time, part-time, and certified special education staff.

Open enrollment numbers change throughout the year as families apply and make final decisions. Currently, Gillett has 28 students enrolling in form outside the district and 74 students enrolling out to another district. These counts reflect our current totals and may change before the school year begins. For example, we currently have 13 Seniors that open enroll out, and will be dropping off the count for the next school year.

In Wisconsin, state aid generally follows the student. For budgeting purposes, a typical per-student amount is about $10,102 per student, and about $14,454 for a student receiving special education services (amounts vary by student and year).

Because enrollment changes each year (including graduations), open enrollment totals and related budget impacts can look different from one school year to the next.

Below are Gillett’s open enrollment counts over the last five school years:

CLICK TO VIEW OPEN ENROLLMENT TRENDS:

Wisconsin school vouchers allow public funds to follow students to private or religious schools, covering tuition costs for qualifying low-to-middle-income families. For more information visit the Department of Instructions website at Private School Choice Programs: Frequently Asked Questions for Parents | Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

Baird data below includes money that follows students open enrolling out of the District (Exhibit A) and voucher exemptions (Exhibit B) deducted from our District’s budget.

CLICK TO VIEW OPEN ENROLLMENT COSTS:

Approximately ten years ago, the district was able to participate in a state program that allowed it to upgrade some of its HVAC systems to more energy efficient systems. This loan will be paid off at the end of the 2026-2027 school year. It is not a penalty, in fact it shows that the school district has gotten creative in its approaches to pay the bill without putting all of the load on local taxpayers.   

According to EMSI and Lightcast Economic Modeling data received by Jayme Sellen from the Tourism & Economic Development Corporation for the Oconto Region (TEDCOR), the Gillett community could expect between $3.2 million and $3.8 million in lost in earnings in the area if the school district were to close or consolidate with another school district.

Districts that have consolidated are still facing the need for referendums. For example, the Trevor and Wilmot school districts consolidated into the Trevor-Wilmot school district in 2006. The Trevor-Wilmot school district has gone to referendum four times since then – 2009, 2021 (failed), 2022 – and is currently looking to pass a referendum this year.

According to a 2025 economic study specifically for Gillett, our population is projected to increase by 1.2% between 2024-2029.  Jobs increased by 9.8% between 20-19 and 2024, which outpaced the national rate by over 5%. 

More information on Gillett’s economic overview can be reviewed here.