Whitefish Bay School District

The School Board held community focus groups and conducted a community facilities survey in summer 2026. More than 170 people attended our focus groups and over 2,100 community members completed the facilities survey.On August 19, the School Board approved a $90 million referendum resolution for the November 3, 2026 ballot.The referendum resolution proposal was heavily informed by summer focus groups and survey, paired with previous data gathered through community sessions, surveys, and advisory committee learning over the past 3+ years. The School Board is incredibly grateful for our community's participation and input.Project Focus AreasThe referendum resolution focuses on the following areas:Rebuilding and Renovating the Middle School on the Current Site ($68.4 million): Rebuilding and renovating the current facility with an updated learning environment on the current middle school site. If approved, updates of the middle school are projected to begin in December 2027 with a 3+ year timeline.Infrastructure, Maintenance & Fire Protection and Alarm System Updates/Replacement at the High School ($35.5 million): Critical updates at the high school include replacing failing HVAC systems and upgrading fire sprinkler and alarm systems.Fire Protection and Alarm System Updates/Replacement at Cumberland and Richards ($4 million): Installation and updates of fire sprinkler and alarm systems at the elementary schools.The district would also contribute approximately $17.9 million from fund balance reserves (primarily from the Long-Term Capital Improvement Trust Fund) toward the projects listed above.

Shall the School District of Whitefish Bay, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin be authorized to issue pursuant to Chapter 67 of the Wisconsin Statutes, general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $90,000,000 for the public purpose of paying the cost of a school building and facility improvement project consisting of: construction of additions, renovations, partial removal of the existing building and site improvements at the Middle School on its current site; building infrastructure and capital maintenance improvements at the High School; fire protection and alarm system updates and replacement at the High School, Cumberland and Richards Elementary Schools; and acquisition of furnishings, fixtures and equipment?→ View a copy of the referendum ballot question

The proposed November 2026 referendum is a scaled-down, more targeted request than the $135.6 million measure on the April 2026 ballot, cutting the total borrowing ask by $45.6 million to $90 million.The current referendum question reduces the scope by removing work at the Lydell School and Community Center and middle school land acquisition, focusing instead on a cost-efficient partial rebuild and remodel of the middle school within its current footprint.Additionally, while the April measure broadly cited general infrastructure updates across all sites, the November proposal explicitly highlights fire protection and fire alarm system overhauls at the high school, Cumberland, and Richards, as well as a necessary and extensive HVAC mechanical replacement planned for the high school.

Yes, community input directly shaped this revised proposal.Following the narrow defeat of the $135.6 million referendum on April 7, 2026 (which failed by just 302 votes), the School Board launched an extensive outreach campaign throughout June and July 2026 to understand what voters wanted changed. This included the following:District-Wide Community Survey: The board commissioned a facilities survey during July 2026, gathering input from over 2,100 district residents, families, and staff members to gauge acceptable borrowing limits and project priorities.Public Focus Groups: The district held two dedicated community-wide focus group sessions in June and July. Additional focus groups included targeted conversations with immediate neighbors of the middle school and local groups (such as supporters of Armory Park/Veterans Memorial) who had raised concerns about green space and land acquisitions under the April proposal.Facilities Advisory Committee Review: School Board members and district leadership revisited options from the Facilities Advisory Committee to align critical physical needs with community feedback.Click to view themes from the June 16 Focus GroupClick to view themes from the July 14 Focus GroupClick to view themes from the Neighborhood Focus GroupClick to view themes from the Armory Friends Focus GroupResources from Focus Groups: Focus Group Presentation, Focus Group Handout

The revenue provided by the proposed referendum will enable the district to move forward with:A full-scale, multiyear renovation of Whitefish Bay Middle School.Upgrades to the mechanical systems, fire protection systems, and fire alarms at the high school.Upgrades to the fire protection systems and fire alarms at Cumberland and Richard Elementary Schools.

The Facilities Planning process began in June 2023, which was also supported by the Community Conversation strategic planning event themes in November 2023. The School Board approved the Facilities Charter in September 2024 to provide a charge for the planning process. The Facilities Subcommittee, Facilities Advisory Committee, and School Board participated in an extensive planning process to identify facilities needs across the district.

The district’s Facilities Charter outlined four priority areas for the facilities planning process, which were the focus of the Facilities Advisory Committee. The priority areas are as follows: Learning Spaces: Ensuring classrooms support modern teaching methods and collaboration.Infrastructure: Addressing aging systems like plumbing, HVAC, and electrical.Health, Safety & Security: Creating secure, accessible, and safe environments for everyone.Sustainability: Improving energy efficiency to reduce long-term costs and environmental impacts.The committee's in-depth review, including tours and a comprehensive facility assessment, has helped determine the full scope of needs and priorities.

For our middle school students, this plan moves beyond simple “brick-and-mortar” repairs to create a high-performance learning environment designed for the unique needs of early adolescence. By constructing a functionally new building on the current middle school site, we can replace outdated, rigid classrooms with flexible learning spaces that mirror the collaborative nature of today’s schools and workplaces.A renovated middle school design would include dedicated specialized spaces, such as advanced science labs and purpose-built sensory areas, that are currently limited by the existing building’s footprint. These upgrades ensure middle school students have a future-ready foundation during these critical developmental years, aligning with the “Acoustics” and “Lighting” foundations highlighted in the Harvard 9 Foundations of a Healthy Building.

District facility needs will not disappear if the referendum is not approved, and the issues cannot be addressed alone through the district’s annual operating budget (known as Fund 10).Because the operational budget is primarily intended for student instruction, staff salaries, and daily programs, diverting these funds to cover large-scale emergency repairs or failing infrastructure would likely require significant cuts to educational programming and services within the next 5-10 years.Without referendum funding, the district loses the ability to use long-term debt to spread out the cost of major capital projects, potentially leading to a “piecemeal” approach that is more expensive over time and fails to address systemic issues like accessibility, safety, security, and flexible learning environments.

Our current 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan includes two primary categories of projects:Budgeted Projects: Approximately $25 million in identified work planned and scheduled over the next 10 years.Unfunded Projects: Approximately $45 million in additional facility needs that have been identified, but are not currently budgeted.If the referendum is approved:This proposed referendum would address the most urgent needs within our facilities and reduce the total amount and cost of projects currently included in the district’s 10-year capital plan and list of un-budgeted capital projects by an estimated $42 million.Over the past five years, the district has spent an average of $2.37 million annually on capital projects to keep pace with our facility needs. With approval of the referendum, that annual capital requirement would decrease to a more manageable figure that would enable the district to address more of these projects over time.It’s important to note that while these two project categories represent a significant portion of the district’s known facility needs, they do not capture all potential or future expenses. School facilities require ongoing maintenance and occasional unplanned repairs. The total referendum investment reflects a more comprehensive approach to addressing both identified needs and broader system-wide improvements, including items beyond the current capital plan and unfunded list.In short, referendum approval would allow the district to address a large portion of both planned and deferred facility needs at once, while substantially reducing the annual capital pressure within the operating budget. However, it would not address all of the needs within the district. Careful long-term planning will still play an important role in the budgeting process.

While finalized construction blueprints will be developed only after a November referendum passes, preliminary conceptual layouts, site frameworks, and programmatic space requirements are available now, with more refined middle school design options and visual scope maps to be presented at the upcoming community facilities sessions. Initial floor plans developed and shared at the August 12, 2026, School Board meeting are available at https://bit.ly/WFBfloorplans.

Construction costs differ significantly among building types due to distinct building codes, structural demands, life expectancy, and broader site requirements.Building and Mechanical Complexity: K-12 Educational facilities are typically more complex and costly than other types of buildings such as retail, industrial, and most office buildings, but often less complex and less costly than building types like medical facilities, higher education, and research labs. Schools require more advanced mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems, specialized acoustics, robust low-voltage/technology infrastructure, enhanced security controls, and durable finishes built for high daily student occupancy that are more complex and built to last longer than some other, less costly building types.Comprehensive Site Work: The budget covers critical scope beyond the building walls, including environmental abatement, demolition of legacy structures, tennis court reconstruction, stormwater management, and street adjustments along Henry Clay Street.Square Footage Breakdown: Direct construction for the proposed approximately 144,000 sq. ft. Middle School is estimated at about $357 per square foot. Total project budgets also factor in soft costs (architectural design, engineering, testing), furniture and equipment, contingencies, and inflation allowances.Professional Estimates and Public Bidding: Figures were established using conceptual design data provided by Plunkett Raysich Architects (PRA) and current market labor and material rates from C.D. Smith. If voters approve the referendum, all individual construction trades (electrical, plumbing, masonry, HVAC, etc.) will go through a competitive public bidding process to ensure maximum value for taxpayers.

The projected middle school cost was established without final blueprints through standard pre-construction estimating, through which architectural experts and construction managers calculate a strict "not-to-exceed" budget based on programmatic square footage needs, recent regional K-12 construction cost data, and engineering assessments of the site.This baseline budget includes comprehensive allowances for material and labor inflation, soft costs like legal and architectural fees, furniture and technology, and contingencies to absorb unforeseen site conditions. This ensures the district secures a reliable funding limit before spending public funds on extensive architectural drawings.

Maintaining a safe environment for students, staff, and neighbors while minimizing community disruption is a top priority throughout the phased construction sequence. As the project progresses, several temporary logistics and site management plans will be implemented:Soccer/Lacrosse Field & Outdoor Space Usage: Portions of the middle school grounds and the soccer/lacrosse athletic field will be closed and enclosed to serve as secure staging areas for equipment, building materials, and contractor operations, including contractor parking throughout the duration of the project, which his estimated to be three years. To accommodate construction footprints during Phase 1 and Phase 2, outdoor recess and physical education activities will temporarily utilize the tennis courts at the nearby High School site.Henry Clay Street & Traffic Logistics: Henry Clay Street (from Kimbark to Ardmore) will need to close to the public for the duration of the project (est. 3 years) to accommodate construction staging, deliveries, utilities, and site utility work. Specific detour routes will be provided. This determination was made after careful consideration of the project sequencing and the site constraints and is necessary for public safety and to complete the work.Sidewalk Closures & Safe Walking Routes: Sidewalks directly bordering active construction zones will be temporarily closed and fenced off. Clear, well-marked pedestrian detour routes and crossing locations will be established before construction begins to ensure students, families, and neighbors can navigate around the campus safely.Construction Vehicle Routing: Contractor vehicles and delivery traffic will be directed along designated truck routes away from peak school drop-off and pick-up times whenever possible to reduce neighborhood traffic congestion.Work Hours, Safety & Noise Control: All construction activity will strictly adhere to Village of Whitefish Bay work-hour ordinances and noise guidelines, which allows work between 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily. Secured safety fencing and dust mitigation barriers will completely separate active construction zones from operational school facilities and public rights-of-way.

Public safety and minimizing community disruption are top priorities throughout the multi-phase construction plan. Key neighborhood impact mitigation and safety measures include:Field & Green Space: Portions of the lacrosse/soccer athletic field will be temporarily repurposed for secure material staging and equipment placement throughout the duration of the project (est. 3 years). Alternate outdoor play arrangements for students will be provided at the High School campus during early phases of construction.Traffic & Henry Clay Street: Henry Clay Street (from Kimbark to Ardmore) will need to close to the public for the duration of the project (est. 3 years) to accommodate construction staging, deliveries, utilities, and site utility work. Specific detour routes and advance notices will be provided. This determination was made after careful consideration of the project sequencing and the site constraints and is necessary for public safety and to complete the work. Construction deliveries will be scheduled to avoid peak student arrival and dismissal times wherever feasible.Sidewalk Closures & Safe Routes: Sidewalks immediately adjacent to the construction site will be closed for safety. Clear, highly visible pedestrian detours and safe walking routes will be established and communicated to families and neighbors prior to the start of work.Site Perimeter & Safety Controls: Construction areas will be completely enclosed with secure fencing, and all work will comply with local noise and safety ordinances. The District will maintain ongoing communication with surrounding neighbors throughout the duration of the project.

An operational referendum increases a district’s state-mandated revenue limit over a period of years and, in essence, raises the annual tax levy in the district by that amount.The increased revenue goes into a district’s operating budget and can be used for any day-to-day expense the district would normally incur. The district is not legally restricted to using the money for any specific purpose. The majority of operating referenda have four- to six-year terms, although they can be longer or shorter.As an example, an operating referendum question might state that the district’s revenue limit will be increased by $20 million over a period of five years. This would allow the district to increase its tax levy by $4 million every year for five years, and spend that $4 million in whichever ways most appropriate for teacher salaries, equipment, vehicles, furniture, or capital projects. This approach could also create a fiscal cliff in the future if the operational referendum does not continue to be approved by the community.A capital referendum allows a district to take on debt (issue bonds) of a specified amount to be used for a specific purpose, and then to raise the tax levy to repay the debt over a period of up to 20 years.As an example, a capital referendum question might authorize a district to raise $20 million to pay for renovations to an elementary school. This would allow that district to issue bonds totaling $20 million and use that money to renovate that elementary school. The district would raise the tax levy each year enough to repay the debt over a period of up to 20 years (which, with interest, would be slightly more than $1 million per year).The district believes a capital referendum is the most responsible and cost-effective way to complete the projects identified by the Facilities Advisory Committee (FAC), prioritized by the community in the survey, and which the School Board believes will address the district's needs over the next 20 years.

Efficiency: It allows the district to raise enough money to fund, plan, coordinate, and complete many projects together. This is more efficient than doing them separately, as it helps manage costs through economies of scale and reduces the risk of future price increases.Predictability: The district can spread the cost of the projects over 20 years of predictable payments. Every household in the district knows today how much it will need to pay over time to fund these projects.Legal Accountability: The money raised is legally committed to the projects identified in the referendum question. This ensures the district will use the funds for the purpose of completing these projects and that these funds will be available for that purpose.Educational Focus: Putting into place a 20-year plan for district facilities allows the district and community to focus on educating students rather than needing to go through the referendum process more frequently.Size and Scope: As most capital projects can be a significant financial commitment for a district and community, spreading this cost out over time reduces the annual tax burden for the community.

The board believes that funding capital projects of this expense and duration through an operating referendum is ill-advised for several reasons:Lack of Guarantee: Because operating funds can be used for any purpose, there is no guarantee that in any given year, a specific amount would be used for capital expenses. There are always extenuating circumstances, and pressure to reallocate funds based on immediate needs can be immense. For example, the board might need to allocate additional funds to teacher compensation instead of capital projects. This creates an immediate issue for capital planning that tends to compound over time.Structural Risks: Operating referendum funds often cover recurring, structural costs, such as salaries. Many districts then get stuck in a cycle of either passing ever-increasing operating referenda or being forced to make difficult decisions, such as increasing class sizes or cutting educational programs.Planning Challenges: With an operating referendum, there would be no guarantee that funds would be available for capital spending in any given year. Therefore, long-term planning would be difficult.Inflationary Costs: If the district were extremely disciplined and used operating referendum funds only for capital projects, it would still need to implement those projects slowly over time. The cost would increase significantly due to inflation. For example, if a $5 million project planned for 2026 is postponed for five years (assuming 5% inflation), that project will cost just under $6.4 million. Waiting 10 years would drive the cost to over $8 million.

After a drop in enrollment during the COVID-19 pandemic, enrollment has stabilized and actually increased each of the last two years (2024-25 and 2025-26) by roughly 30 students each year. The Whitefish Bay School District currently has 2,871 enrolled students.To determine long-term projections, the district worked with consultant MD Roffers to conduct an enrollment study, which was completed in Spring 2025. The results of the study were shared at a May 28, 2025 board meeting.The study showed enrollment staying relatively flat, with a decrease of 128 students across all district schools by 2040. The study anticipated an increase in students at Cumberland and decreases at Richards, the middle school, and the high school.

By acting now, we can address critical infrastructure needs and provide students with a learning environment that meets their needs for generations to come.Delaying the proposed referendum projects will lead to higher costs later due to inflation, rising material and labor costs, and other factors.