$500,000 operational referendum will also be on the ballot

The Spring Valley School Board unanimously voted to send a $7.1 million football, track and multi-purpose athletic complex and a $500,000 operational request to an official referendum vote in April, as decided at the board meeting on Monday, Jan. 16.

The Monday evening vote was more of a formality, as all the board members had clearly stated their favorable opinions regarding the two referendum questions at a special board meeting the week before on Monday, Jan. 9. Spring Valley Superintendent John Groh spoke about sending the two proposals to a referendum.

“Anytime a community goes to referendum, it’s powerful, because rarely does a community get a chance to decide something directly,” Groh said. “When it’s separating a community from its own money, it’s extremely important. It’s enormous, but it’s not a unique one. Spring Valley has gone to referendum twice in the past six years that were both passed.”

It’s important to note that the two referendum questions are not inherently tied together and they will appear as separate questions on the ballot in April. That means community members could realistically approve neither, one or both of the referendum questions.

Both the questions on the April ballot will appear verbatim at the end of this story so that Spring Valley constituents can get a preview of what they will see on voting day.

If both referenda are approved in April, those residing in the Spring Valley School District will see their taxes raised by $97 per year for every $100,000 worth of property value.

The operational referendum is $500,000 annually for three years. The district would use those additional funds to cover standard operating expenses within the school district that have sharply risen throughout the last two years due to inflation.

As of Monday, Jan. 23, the Spring Valley School District is on pace to operate at an approximate $330,000 deficit for the 2022-23 school year. That means without the referendum, the district would have to dip into its fund balance – which is essentially a savings account – to cover the inflated expenses for the year.

If approved, the $500,000 operational referendum would cover those expenses, prevent the district from dipping into its more than healthy fund balance and would even By Reagan Hoverman return Spring Valley to a small surplus for the foreseeable future.

The second question on the ballot is a facilities referendum for the $7.1 million football, track and multi-purpose athletic complex that would make Spring Valley a state-of-the-art athletic destination.

The facility would be a football field encircled by a track and field complex complete with artificial turf. The facility would best resemble other top-rate complexes in western Wisconsin including Hudson, River Falls, Baldwin-Woodville and others.

If approved, Spring Valley’s track and field teams would have adequate facilities for the first time since the 1980s. For the better part of three decades, both track and field teams have either practiced in the parking lot, nearby green space or were regularly bussed to other schools with proper complexes. If the taxpayers vote yes, those outdated circumstances would go the way of the dodo.

The $7.1 million cost of the facility would be paid back over 20 years – or faster – depending on how aggressively the school district wants to be with repaying the debt.

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.

As part of the process leading up to April’s voting day, the Spring Valley School District will be implementing a community plan designed to get detailed information out to the public as efficiently as possible so that voters can go into the booth as informed as possible.

The communication plan includes social media informational videos, hard copy fliers, community meetings, newspaper articles, and phone calls and emails to parents and staff in the final days before the official vote. The district website will also have a frequently asked questions page in the coming weeks about the referenda. Superintendent Groh spoke about the informational campaign.

“It’s mainly through social media. We’re going to do some short social media videos one or two minutes in length, an information flier hopefully in the third week of February, and some community meetings,” Groh said. “The first (community meeting) will most likely be Feb. 6 right after the special board meeting. My goal is no matter how people vote, that they vote based on solid information, whether it’s a yes or a no. If anyone has questions, please reach out to me.”

Voting day for both referenda is slated for April 4. Both the referendum questions as they will appear on the ballot are as follows: Question Number I: Shall the School District of Spring Valley, Pierce, St. Croix and Dunn Counties, Wisconsin be authorized to exceed the revenue limit specified in Section 121.91, Wisconsin Statutes, by $500,000 per year beginning with the 2023-2024 school year and ending with the 2025-2026 school year, for non-recurring purposes consisting of operational expenses?

Question Number II: Shall the School District of Spring Valley, Pierce, St. Croix and Dunn Counties, Wisconsin be authorized to issue pursuant to Chapter 67 of the Wisconsin Statutes, general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $7,100,000 for the public purpose of paying the cost of a school building and facility improvement project consisting of: construction of an outdoor athletic facility consisting of a track and field complex and football/co-curricular facility with spectator seating on District-owned land; site improvements; and acquisition of related equipment?