Frederica Freyberg:

The state’s two-year spending plan is in the books tonight. Two months past due but signed into law late this week and before the end of summer as the governor promised. Also this week, the governor signed the multibillion dollar incentive package to bring the Taiwanese technology company to southeast Wisconsin. With the stroke of a pen, Governor Scott Walker this week signed the bill approving up to $3 billion in state subsidies for the Foxconn plant to locate in Wisconsin.

Scott Walker:

And I’m proud to say that not only will these LCD panels be made for the first time in America, they’ll be made proudly here in the great state of Wisconsin.

[applause]

Frederica Freyberg:

More strokes struck items in the bill by way of the governor’s veto pen, including the elimination of legislative oversight of $250 million in highway borrowing for I-94, a stretch of road that will serve Foxconn. The location of the plant is pegged for a 1,000 acre quadrangle along I-94 in Racine County. Some land owners with property where the company expects to build a $10 billion plant have said they’ve been offered $50,000 an acre. The state and Foxconn still have to sign a contract detailing the incentive package and certain requirements for job creation and wages. Governor Walker had a big week. He also signed in to law the two-year state budget. A $76 billion spending plan that plumps up education funding, but fails to find a long-term funding source for roads and highways. He made extensive use of his veto pen in the budget. He appeased some Republican senators by making repeal of the prevailing wage take effect immediately rather than in a year. In all he vetoed nearly 100 items in the spending plan as passed. A key one eliminated a funding increase for low spending school districts saying that would result in a substantial increase in property tax capacity. Joint Finance Republican Co-chair John Nygren expressed his disappointment in that veto saying, quote, as a result, over 200 school districts across the state will lose over $90 million in funding over the next six years. One of those districts is also sorely disappointed by the veto because the item written in the budget by the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee would have increased the maximum that low spending districts could spend for each student by $300 over two years, getting those districts up to $9,400 per student. The increased funding would have come from a combination of state aid and property taxes. The Adams-Friendship district was looking forward to that bump. We checked in with its district administrator Jim Boebel. Thank you very much for being here.

Jim Boebel:

Thank you for the invitation.

Frederica Freyberg:

What is your reaction to the veto that takes away the funding increase for low spending districts?

Jim Boebel:

It's a disappointment. In our district and statewide, that was one of those opportunities in which we could have helped all the students in our state. And it was taken away.

Frederica Freyberg:

Was that unexpected, that veto?

Jim Boebel:

It was. All of the news reports that our people had been informing us going into the signing of the budget was that there was a great chance that that, revenue cap would be raised. And then, boy, it started about a day before where we started hearing stories about there’s potential that it will be vetoed out.

Frederica Freyberg:

Had you kind of factored that in to your accounting mix there already or how did you handle that?

Jim Boebel:

Well, we factor everything from worst case to best case scenario. And our school budget the last two years has been a deficit budget. So we are trying to be responsible stewards with our taxpayers’ money. Going into next year, this year and next year we also projected deficit budget. So having that money, that revenue cap stay where it is, it makes us become even more — we have to be more careful with every dollar that we spend. That it has to go directly into student learning.

Frederica Freyberg:

Let's unpack that deficit situation a little bit. What is your deficit going into this school year? And how might that grow going into next?

Jim Boebel:

Well, currently projected for this school year, it’s about $350,000, and that for me is a sizeable amount when our total budget is around $18.5 million. Last year we ended up $650,000 negative. So those decisions that we have to make are so impactful and it makes it even more difficult for us, because we are a rural district. We’re 500 square miles. It costs a lot to bring our students in. And we have declining enrollment. Those factors all point towards a difficult budget to get through.

Frederica Freyberg:

What will that difficult budget mean in the classroom and in other areas of your schools?

Jim Boebel:

Well, we’re doing everything we can to keep those cuts away from student learning in the classroom. What it’s going to force us to do is go to our taxpayers and ask for more funds.

Frederica Freyberg:

What's the appetite for those kinds of referendums in your district?

Jim Boebel:

An operating referendum we haven’t passed before. So this will be a new venture if that’s the decision we make. The board hasn’t decided that yet. But looking at how the numbers are stacking up, it certainly looks like a possibility. One thing I do know is my family moving into the district here just recently, this place cares about their kids. And as long as the district can prove we’re doing this and this will help our students learn and we will be able to sustain it, I'm confident going forward the community will say, “Yes, we’ll support it.”

Frederica Freyberg:

Are lean budgets and deficit budgets something that students and parents notice?

Jim Boebel:

I'm sorry. Could you say that again, please?

Frederica Freyberg:

Are these lean budgets and then deficit budgets something that students and parents notice and talk about? Or is this mostly just the burden in the front office there of the district office?

Jim Boebel:

I don’t know if a student would talk about it but certainly the parents are aware. They’re aware of how we are trying to make the most with what we have. And we’re trying to do our best as a district to educate our parents and our taxpayers as far as here’s what we can do. And here’s the best option. And here’s how, not only today, because we really have a duty to serve our students that came to school every day this year. But we also have to plan ahead, three, five years down the road, too.

Frederica Freyberg:

Right. You are however glad about the overall bump in per pupil spending in the budget. How far might that go towards easing your deficit?

Jim Boebel:

To be clear, we’re ecstatic. The per pupil categorical increase of $200 this year, $204 next year. That is the best thing that we could hope for. The problem is it didn’t adjust or didn’t impact the state funding formula. And that is where a district like Adams-Friendship in which we have high property values because of the lakes. So the formula looks at our district and says high property values, you have of the money to support, but what it doesn’t factor in is that 68% of our students are in poverty. I wish it would calculate that into the factor.

Frederica Freyberg:

You are in a difficult circumstance. We appreciate you talking with us about it. Jim Boebel, district administrator, Adams-Friendship, thanks a lot. Good luck.

Jim Boebel:

Thank you so much.