SV School Board expects to bring 7.1M athletic complex to referendum

Official vote to be taken at Jan. 16 board meeting

Reagan Hoverman
Posted 1/10/23

SPRING VALLEY – After gauging board interest without taking any official action, the Spring Valley School Board all but decided to send a $7.1 million football, track and multi-purpose athletic complex, as well as a three-year $500,000 operational request to an official referendum vote, as was discussed at the special board meeting on Monday, Jan. 9.

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

SV School Board expects to bring 7.1M athletic complex to referendum

Official vote to be taken at Jan. 16 board meeting

Posted

SPRING VALLEY – After gauging board interest without taking any official action, the Spring Valley School Board all but decided to send a $7.1 million football, track and multi-purpose athletic complex, as well as a three-year $500,000 operational request to an official referendum vote, as was discussed at the special board meeting on Monday, Jan. 9.

At the Monday afternoon meeting, Spring Valley Superintendent John Groh presented the board with six different options regarding a possible plan for a referendum, which included everything from no action at all to full approval for an athletic complex and an operational referendum.

While the board took no official action, the seven members came to a consensus and indicated that they will likely approve a resolution Jan. 16 to place the $7.1 million football, track and multi-purpose athletic complex and the $500,000 operational referendum on the April ballot.

The operational referendum would be $500,000 annually for three years. The school district would use that money to cover expenses that have steadily increased throughout the last two years due to inflation.

For the 2022-23 academic year, Spring Valley is on pace to operate at an approximate $333,000 deficit. That means some of the funding to cover standard expenses is slated to come out of the fund balance, which is essentially a savings account for the school.

Although Spring Valley’s fund balance is quite healthy and more than double what is required, the board is likely going to want to avoid dipping into that cash reserve. The $500,000 operational referendum would cover the inflated cost of running a school district daily and would even return Spring Valley to a small surplus. Groh spoke about the basic premise of the operational referendum.

“It would be to maintain our fund balance and to maintain our programming and recruit and retain high-quality staff,” Groh said. “If we don’t have that happen, we’re going to be using our fund balance. It would be spread out on general operating needs. Right now we’re projecting a deficit, this would take care of it and we would have a modest surplus.”

All seven school board members expressed support for bringing the operational request to an official referendum. After that discussion had concluded, the board opened a dialogue regarding the $7.1 million multi-purpose athletic complex that could also be brought to a referendum.

The multi-purpose facility would be a football stadium encircled by a track and field complex complete with state-of-the-art artificial turf, similar to the fields at River Falls, Baldwin-Woodville, Hudson and many other high schools throughout Wisconsin.

The complete cost of the facility would be $7.1 million, which would be paid back over 20 years – or faster – depending on the district’s approach to debt repayment. Taxpayers in the Spring Valley School District would see their taxes raised by $97 per year for every $100,000 worth of property value.

In the summer of 2022, Spring Valley paid a company to conduct a survey of likely voters in the district gauging their interest regarding the aforementioned multi-million dollar athletic facility. The company, School Perceptions, based out of Slinger, reported that 58.3% of likely voters in the district would support or vote yes on a potential referendum for the athletic complex.

School Perceptions is historically 95% accurate with a margin of error of plus or minus 4%. That means that even on the low end, 54.3% of likely voters would support the referendum. Board Treasurer Sandy Jacobs was the first to speak about the athletic complex.

“As far as the (athletic complex), I would like to see it, but it’s also a tough time financially for people,” Jacobs said. “I know that through strategic planning and the survey, there are a lot of people that want it. I would like to see the community be given all the information so they can make an informed decision about where their tax money is going.”

After Jacobs finished speaking, board member Bobbie Jaeger and Board President April Robelia expressed support for both the operational and facilities (athletic complex) referendums. Shortly thereafter, Board Clerk Matthew Schreiber also spoke in favor of both proposals. 

Vice President Jennelle Wolf expressed her support and then board member Dan Stasiek provided his thoughts on the two potential referendums.

“Based on what we’ve heard from the community, (the athletic complex) has to be in there,” Stasiek said. “It’s a question of whether or not to add the operational. I think we do, but there is a scary part there because we didn’t have that in the survey. It wasn’t explained that there would also be an operational referendum. That’s a big problem and it’s an integrity problem.”

Stasiek is referring to the survey, which didn’t include the three-year $500,000 operational referendum. It wasn’t included because, at the time of the survey, the school district didn’t have any indication that they could or would be potentially operating in a deficit for the year. Essentially, it wasn’t needed at the time the survey was constructed.

Because a second referendum is now likely needed – at least to avoid dipping into the fund balance – Stasiek fears that having two referenda on the ballot could potentially shipwreck the chances of either passing.

To clarify, the referendum wouldn’t be an all-or-nothing proposal. If they both make it to a ballot in April, Spring Valley taxpayers could realistically look at both and vote “yes” on one and “no” on the other. They would be separate agenda items when it comes to voting in the spring.

Of the seven board members, five openly advocated for both the operational and facilities referenda. Board member Monica Vorlicek and the aforementioned Jacobs both supported the operational referendum but were a bit more cautious about moving ahead with the athletic facilities referendum.

Ultimately, the seven board members came to a consensus and indicated that they will likely approve both the operation and facility proposals to officially go to referendum in April.

If approved on Jan. 16 and then approved in April by the taxpayers, the multi-million dollar athletic complex construction could begin as early as the summer of 2023 and would likely be open for the fall sports season in 2024.

Spring Valley School District, Spring Valley, Wisconsin, athletic complex, referendum, April 2023 election