Yes, there’s a possible 4.1% Elmbrook increase

But I’ve been told I’m just too negative about the district, so I’ll let you discuss this article without me.


  1. Cheri M. says:

    Just a guess here, but whereas they’re cutting teachers due to lower enrollment… but adding ESL teachers, is this indicative of extra costs associated with non-resident students? Or is the residential population demographic changing to contain a higher percentage of non-English-speaking families? If so, what languages are being spoken by our newest residents? Is there a trend?

  2. No Child Left Behind is probably a factor too. The law requires an awful lot of testing, which is teacher-time consuming. My English-speaking child was flagged for evaluation one year because I indicated on a form that other languages are spoken in our home also.

  3. Winegirl says:

    I’m waiting for the next building referendum proposal as well. The high schools weren’t the end of it.

  4. Not just another building referendum. I have no doubt that we will face an operational referendum in the not too distant future.

  5. So has anyone figured out how this stacks up to what they “said” the increase would be if the referendum passed?

  6. No, Libby, because at this point they pretty much get to do anything they want. They spun it to get it passed and there’s no way to unwind that decision.

  7. Robert K. says:

    According to the spring newsletter insert re: the building referendum, the average taxpayer could expect to pay 53 cents for every $1,000 of assessed value on your home. This translates into a 3.35% increase — which is what they sold the plan as. Apparently, within the last week and a half since voting, the percentage went to 4.1% as stated in today’s Journal Sentinel. That’s a 22% increase over the percentage they sold us on. One can only imagine what the final percentage increase will be!

  8. So they’re raising costs, yet removing the Athletic Directors from teaching one class? It seems like this would be a good way to help keep costs down. But oh, I forgot, this is athletics we’re talking about. Good grief.

  9. BrkfldDad says:

    Robert K – that figure was for the referendum alone, not factoring in any other increases! Either way it still stinks…

  10. I saw it as interest related to referendum borrowing, general operating increases (including a million plus to stash), and retiree benefits payment.

    The main catch is that the board is taxing to the maximum under caps and adding the referendum on top of that. No compassion at all.