Author: WFBBuzz

Two weeks ago, when we last checked in with the School Board, the path ahead for the next referendum was rather murky. The board was debating on a date, whether to bring in a third party to facilitate community sessions, what level of cost the community would support and what option the board may push for on the middle school. 

Fast forward to this week and the view is starting to come into focus after Wednesday night’s nearly three-hour meeting. Here are my key observations and takeaways.

The board’s discussion centered around a memo drafted by the Superintendent Dr. Jamie Foeckler. For those not fond of navigating BoardDocs, the memo can be found here.

What hasn’t changed from earlier meetings is the priority of any new referendum – the middle school. That remains the focus and centerpiece of the next referendum. While nothing is set in stone, it appears the School Board is leaning towards revisiting the rebuild option on Armory Park, while incorporating a replacement memorial either into the new structure and/or replacing it within the green space that would subsequently open up at the current middle school site.

The numbers being discussed are lower than the $135.6 million proposed in April 2026. While not a main focus of the discussion at the board meeting, the memo described three potential options. The district would commit $17 million in district capital from current funds, down from $20 million proposed in April:

• Option A — $90.2M net referendum ask (Gross: $107.2M): New middle school ($67.7M), high school mechanical systems and fire protection ($35.5M), elementary fire protection and alarms ($4M)
• Option B — $99.9M net referendum ask (Gross: $116.9M): Everything in Option A, plus safety and security upgrades for all buildings ($9.7M)
• Option C — $111.5M net referendum ask (Gross: $128.5M): Everything in Options A and B, plus HVAC upgrades for elementary schools ($11.6M)

The tax impact on the average Whitefish Bay home (assessed at $685,800) would range from $857/year for Option A to $1,173/year for Option C, assuming 22-year borrowing at 4.5% interest. Notably, the district is set to pay off its 2009 referendum debt later this year, so those figures reflect that reduction.

The Timeline Is Tight — Very Tight

The memo lays out a schedule that leaves almost no margin for error. The August 25th statutory deadline for a November referendum means the board would prefer to finalize ballot language by August 12th.

That is a compressed window if the board decides to hold formal community engagement sessions or conduct a new survey. The board discussed the effectiveness of a community survey held during the summer months. The practical challenge of conducting a survey in June and July may yield a lower response rate, a point the communications consultant (more on that below) later reinforced.

The MOU Discussion

For Villagers watching closely, the Village Board went into closed session during their last meeting “regarding Whitefish Bay School District’s use of park land.” Some clues about what that discussion may have been about emerged at the School Board meeting. A significant portion of the meeting was spent on whether to formalize a Memorandum of Understanding with the Village regarding the potential land use at Armory Park for a new middle school.

Some board members were eager to move forward with a memorandum ahead of time, arguing it addresses a specific concern raised by voters — that the village land deal was too vague and unformalized in the prior referendum. Others felt it was premature to lock anything in writing before hearing from the community, given there is no guarantee that the board will move forward with any Armory Park building. Ultimately, the tight timeline may dictate a necessity to put the cart before the horse in certain instances.   

The Armory Memorial: Creating Visuals

One of the more emotionally charged undercurrents in the meeting was the Armory Memorial. The memo raises two design concepts that align with the earlier referendum: integrating the memorial into the exterior of a new middle school, or rebuilding it within new green space on the current middle school site. This time around, there would likely be effort put into creating visuals and design concepts of the memorial for the public to review.

Several board members emphasized that any visual presentation of what the memorial might look like needs to involve the veteran community and other stakeholders before anything is released publicly. One board member noted that opposition messaging during the April campaign framed the project as the destruction of the memorial rather than its relocation or enhancement, a characterization that stuck, fairly or not. Getting ahead of that with community-developed visuals, rather than board-developed ones, could be the difference between winning or losing that specific argument the second time around.

The Board Will Soon Be Debt-Free (Pending a Future Referendum, Of Course)

Somewhat buried amid the referendum discussion was a resolution the board unanimously passed. The board voted to pay off two remaining debt obligations early, bonds from 2013 and a loan from 2010, which were all set to mature between 2027 and 2030.

The financial reasoning: the district estimates that by paying off within this fiscal year rather than next, its projected state equalization aid for next year would increase by approximately $600,000, meaning $600,000 less needed to be levied from the community. The district also estimates that there would be roughly $20,000 in interest savings from the move.

Meet the New Communications Consultant: Donovan Group

The board approved hiring the Donovan Group, a Wisconsin-based communications firm, to provide “comprehensive ballot measure campaign support” at a cost of $30,000. Brian Nicol, a partner with the firm and a former communications director in the Howard-Suamico School District near Green Bay, presented to the board.

The board mentioned that they did not identify a finalist for the separate community engagement facilitator role. It had appeared that the community engagement facilitator RFP was the priority in prior meetings, while the RFP for the communications consultant was secondary. The scope of services of the Donovan Group contract leaves open the possibility that they may play both roles rather than necessitating the district needing to hire a second consultant.

The Bigger Picture

While the path is still being paved, Tuesday’s meeting offered plenty of hints at the board’s preferred direction. Several members were candid that building the middle school at Armory Park, with the memorial relocated or incorporated into the new design, remains their leading option. Others pushed back, arguing that community sessions shouldn’t be framed around a conclusion the board may have already reached.

The next School Board meeting is June 10th, with potential community engagement sessions proposed for June 16th and July 14th. More to come.

As we head into the final stretch of the school year, I felt it was a good moment to check in on Whitefish Bay High School alumni playing D1 sports. A remarkable group of Blue Duke alumni are competing at the highest level of college athletics this year. Creating a list wasn’t the easiest task, so please let me know if I missed anyone competing at the D1 level. 

Here’s a look at where they are and how they’ve performed:

FOOTBALL

Joe Brunner — Offensive Line, Indiana Hoosiers (WFB Class of 2022) After four seasons at Wisconsin, including two years as a starting left guard with 24 consecutive starts, Brunner entered the transfer portal and joined Indiana for the 2026 season, his final year of eligibility. He earned All-Big Ten Honorable Mention honors following the 2025 campaign with the Badgers and is expected to start at left guard for a Hoosiers program coming off a national championship. 

Caleb Bowers — Long Snapper, Florida State Seminoles (WFB Class of 2022) Bowers arrived at Florida State for 2026 after a four-year career at North Dakota State, where he appeared in 44 consecutive games. In his final season with the Bison in 2025, he was named a Stats Perform FCS All-American and earned First Team All-Missouri Valley Football Conference honors, all while being part of the NDSU program that won the 2024 FCS National Championship.

Grover Bortolotti — Running Back, Wisconsin Badgers (WFB Class of 2021) In his final season in 2025, Bortolotti played in all 12 games primarily on special teams, recording six tackles. The Whitefish Bay native finished his five-year career at Wisconsin before transitioning directly into coaching. He was hired as assistant running backs coach at Michigan State in March 2026.

Harrison Bortolotti — Running Back, Wisconsin Badgers (WFB Class of 2025) Bortolotti joined Wisconsin as a preferred walk-on in fall 2025. He played in five games as a true freshman, primarily on special teams.

Nick Bakken — Offensive Line, Washington State Cougars (WFB Class of 2024) Bakken transferred to Washington State from South Dakota State ahead of the 2025 season. He appeared in one game for the Cougars before an injury ended his year early.

BASEBALL

Jack Counsell — Infielder, Northwestern Wildcats (WFB Class of 2023) The son of Cubs manager Craig Counsell transferred from Michigan to Northwestern ahead of 2025. He started 18 games, playing mostly second base and DH while hitting .250 for the season.

Tyler Andrews — Pitcher, UW–Milwaukee Panthers (WFB Class of 2024) Andrews is in his sophomore season with the Panthers of the Horizon League and pitched in 10.2 innings this year.

Michael Lippe — Outfielder, Minnesota Gophers (WFB Class of 2022) After three seasons at Louisville, Lippe transferred to Minnesota for his senior year in 2026. He has been an active contributor, starting 28 games with a batting average of .221.

SOCCER

Lucia Englund — Defender, Iowa Hawkeyes (WFB Class of 2023) Englund transferred this off season to Iowa following an outstanding junior season at Butler in fall 2025. She earned All-Big East Second Team honors. She started all 16 matches and was named Big East Defensive Player of the Week after scoring the game-winning goal and adding an assist in a 3-1 win over Providence. She also earned the CSC Academic All-District recognition.

Sofia Englund — Forward/Midfielder, St. Thomas Tommies (WFB Class of 2023) Englund appeared in 14 matches with 13 starts in 2025 and earned the CSC Academic All-District recognition.  

Ella Luna — Midfielder, Creighton Bluejays (WFB Class of 2023) After a season at Ole Miss, Luna transferred to Creighton for the 2024 season. She scored the opening goal of Creighton’s year against Oklahoma on August 14 and appeared in three matches for the Bluejays.

Breon Jarvis — Defender, UW–Milwaukee Panthers (WFB Class of 2024) Jarvis finished his sophomore season with the UWM men’s soccer program making eight starts and appearing in 18 of the team’s 19 games. He was named to the Horizon League Academic Honor Roll.

Will Smith — Defender, Wisconsin Badgers (WFB Class of 2022) Smith served as a team captain for the Badgers in his junior season in fall 2025, starting nine of 12 games.

Quinn Muderlak – Midfielder, Air Force Academy Falcons (WFB Class of 2025) Muderlak earned 11 starts and scored one goal in his freshman season this year.

SWIMMING & DIVING

Casey Stephens — Miami (Ohio) RedHawks (WFB class of 2023) Stephens fought through injuries this year and earned CSC Academic All-District and Academic All-MAC team honors.  In 2025, she won the MAC Championship in the 1,650-yard freestyle (16:45.72) and received First Team All-MAC honors.

TRACK & FIELD / CROSS COUNTRY

Lola Kolawole — Virginia Cavaliers (WFB Class of 2023) In outdoor 2026, Kolawole recorded a personal best in the 200m (24.38) to finish 3rd at the Virginia Grand Prix. She also won the 200m at the Virginia Challenge. Last year, Kolawole earned All-ACC Academic Team honors.

Paige Haglund — Marquette Golden Eagles (WFB Class of 2025) Haglund joined Marquette’s cross country and track program as a freshman in 2025-26. She competed in five events this year and ran a personal best in the 400m (1:04.7) at the Tierney Classic. She also ran a personal best mile (5:20.54) at the Red Hawk Invite.

Lily Kriegel — Vanderbilt Commodores (WFB Class of 2024) Kriegel excelled in her sophomore year running for Vanderbilt. She holds multiple school records, including the 3,000 meters (9:05.28) and the outdoor 5,000 meters (15:56.34). She earned a spot on the SEC Academic Honor Roll as well this year.

Jonathan Lukas — Creighton Bluejays (WFB Class of 2022) Completed his senior season this year at Creighton in the Big East. Placed 4th in the 3000 meters (8:59.34) at the Prairie Wolf Indoor. In 2024-25, finished with the seventh-fastest 3,000 meters in Creighton history with a time of 8:55.90 at the Musco Twilight.

VOLLEYBALL

Zoe Behrendt — Setter, North Carolina Tar Heels (WFB Class of 2023) As a Junior, Behrednt was selected as one of the team’s captains this past year. Finished the year with 675 assists, 21 service aces, and 224 digs. She has appeared in every match across the course of her college career.

LACROSSE

Chloe Bowers — Attack, UMass-Lowell River Hawks (WFB Class of 2024) Bowers has been one of the most prolific offensive players in UMass Lowell history since arriving in Lowell. As a freshman in 2024, she set a then-program record with 48 goals in a single season. In her junior campaign this year, she started 11 games and scored 25 goals.

Whitefish Bay and Shorewood sit side by side in the North Shore. Similar in physical size, population, and aging infrastructure issues and historically both regarded as among the strongest school districts in Wisconsin. But in 2026, the two communities are navigating strikingly different challenges when it comes to their schools. One is wrestling with what to build. The other is wrestling with what to close.

Shorewood resident Brian Stoffel recently posted a video in local Facebook groups to raise awareness and explain the complexities at play within Shorewood’s school system. I was able to connect with Brian to learn more about what is happening in Shorewood with a potential closing of the Shorewood Intermediate School and how it may or may not be relevant to the conversation in Whitefish Bay (hint, it’s probably less relevant than some may hope).

First, an Overview of The Communities Behind the Districts

The demographic differences between the two villages are modest but meaningful when it comes to school enrollment.

Whitefish Bay, with a 2025 population of 14,489, skews young: 31% of residents are under 18 years of age (well above the national average of 21.5%) and only 14% are 65 or older according to the US Census Bureau. 

Shorewood, at 13,474 residents, looks quite different. Only 19% of the population is under 18, below the national average, and 17% are 65 or older. 

Whitefish Bay’s district enrolled 2,861 students in 2024-25 or 49% more than Shorewood’s 1,916. But the headline enrollment numbers don’t fully capture either district’s situation.

As was laid out in Whitefish Bay School District’s Community Change & Student Enrollment Projections Report last year, overall enrollment has declined about 8% over the past decade. Two-thirds of that decline is attributable to the wind-down of the Chapter 220 integration program: as of 2024, only 37 Chapter 220 students remain, down from higher levels earlier in the decade. Non-220 open enrollment also dropped from 59 students to zero. Strip those program changes out, and Whitefish Bay’s enrollment of district-resident students has declined by less than 1%, a remarkably stable local base. 

Last year’s report concluded a projected decrease of 128 students between 2024 and 2040. With almost two years of look-back on that report at our disposal today, it should be noted that attendance so far has gone the other direction from the report’s predictions. At the start of this school year, attendance increased to 2,878 and the district’s enrollment in January jumped to 2,896, which is a 113 student difference compared to the projected trend in the report of 2,783 for the 2026-27 school year. 

As Brian shared with me, Shorewood tells a different story. The district’s enrollment has seen a steady decline over the past 10 years with a recent peak in the 2016-17 school year at 2,163 students. Enrollment has declined since, with a notable drop around 2019-20. The district currently sits at 1,916 students, down 11% from that peak, and unlike Whitefish Bay, the drop reflects broader demographic shifts rather than program changes. The Shorewood district has been working to align staffing levels with enrollment trends to maintain financial stability.

Buildings, Space, and the Utilization Question

This is where Brian and I noted the two districts’ situations diverge most sharply and where the comparison gets most instructive.

Whitefish Bay operates four active school buildings (Richards, Cumberland, the Middle School, and the High School) plus the Lydell Community Center, totaling 660,000 square feet on nearly 40 acres. Not including Lydell, the district has 638,335 square feet across 34 acres. With 2,861 students, that works out to roughly 223 square feet per student.

Shorewood operates four school buildings (Atwater Elementary, Lake Bluff Elementary, Shorewood Intermediate School, and the High School) totaling 516,575 square feet. With 1,916 students, Shorewood has about 270 square feet per student or 20% more space per student than Whitefish Bay.

One wrinkle Brian felt it worth noting when comparing available square footage of the facilities: Shorewood High School was designed more like a college campus than a traditional school, with non-connected buildings spread across the grounds. That makes the district’s total square footage figures somewhat hard to interpret, though it likely undercounts the true square footage in comparison to Whitefish Bay’s.

Shorewood Intermediate School currently serves approximately 300 students in grades 7 and 8. Brian explained that under the consolidation scenario being considered, those students could move to the high school campus, though key details haven’t been released yet. It’s still unclear exactly how the set up may work. For example, Brian suggested that the 7th and 8th graders might still be able to use the SIS cafeteria or the middle school athletic teams may continue to use the SIS gym even after the building otherwise closes. 

Spending: Whitefish Bay Does More With Less Per Student

The financial comparison between the two districts is striking as well. Both districts had similar total revenues in 2022-23 (the most recent available from the National Center for Education Statistics in the US Department of Education): Whitefish Bay at $46.2 million, Shorewood at $41.3 million. But because Whitefish Bay serves 49% more students, its per-pupil cost is substantially lower, spending $8k/student less or a whopping difference of 36%.

	WFB	Shorewood
Total Revenue (’22-’23)	$46.2M	$41.3M
Revenue per Student	$16k	$21k
Total Spending (’22-’23)	$40.8M	$42.8M
Spending per Student	$14k	$22k
Total Students (’24-’25)	2,861	1,916
Teachers (FTE ’24-’25)	179	131.2
Student/Teacher Ratio	16:1	15:1

The income gap between the two communities adds important context. Whitefish Bay’s median household income of $157,109 is nearly double Shorewood’s $86,726 (US Census Bureau). Combined with Whitefish Bay’s significantly lower per-student spending, the two districts are operating with very different relationships between what they spend and what their residents can bear, a gap that shapes every conversation about referendums, tax levies, and facilities investment. 

Shorewood’s Budget Pressure

Shorewood currently relies on an operating referendum, approved by voters in 2023, that allows the district to levy an extra $5.5 million per year beyond the state formula. That referendum runs through approximately 2028. As Brian states it, the challenge is that even if the district comes back to voters asking to continue at the same $5.5 million level, the projected need by 2028 is closer to $7.5 million annually. That’s a roughly $2 million structural gap, driven primarily by salaries increasing roughly 3% per year and health insurance costs rising as much as 10% annually, all while enrollment is flat or declining.

Closing SIS, according to the district’s long-term sustainability task force, could save $1 to $1.5 million per year by eliminating duplicated administrative roles and reducing facilities operating costs across one fewer building. That’s a significant chunk of the gap, though by itself doesn’t close it entirely.

Brian makes one observation that lands with particular force: Whitefish Bay spends less on average teacher pay and if Shorewood paid its teachers at the same average rate as Whitefish Bay, the savings would make a substantial dent in the district’s budget shortfall if not even eliminate it. His broader takeaway is that Whitefish Bay, on a per-student basis, is running an unusually efficient operation and that efficiency gap is a big part of why the solutions that make sense for Shorewood won’t translate across the village line. 

Two Different Problems, One Shared Lesson

Whitefish Bay’s challenge is a building problem: its middle school is at 94% capacity in facilities that are aging and increasingly inadequate, and the district is trying to figure out whether to renovate or build new, a question that involves significant community investment either way. The Whitefish Bay School Board is now embarking on a summer community engagement process before deciding whether to return to voters in November 2026.

Shorewood’s challenge is an enrollment-and-capacity problem on top of an operational budget deficit: too much building for too few students, with budget pressure forcing difficult staffing decisions. Considering closing the Intermediate School building and moving 7th and 8th graders to the high school campus may be a logical response to those realities — but it comes with real disruption to a roughly 300-student community that, by most academic measures, is functioning well, and where students currently enjoy a distinct middle school experience that would look quite different inside a high school building.

Brian, whose video series on Shorewood’s school district challenges was the genesis of this comparison, puts it well: the two districts may be neighbors, but their problems are fundamentally different in kind. Borrowing solutions across that divide is unlikely to serve either community well. The value of the comparison isn’t to suggest one district should follow the other’s lead — it’s to understand that the right answer for each will need to be shaped by its own demographics, finances, and community values. 

Neither problem is easy. And residents of both communities are paying close attention.

Five weeks after voters narrowly rejected the district’s $135.6 million facilities referendum, the Whitefish Bay School Board meets again tonight at 5:30 p.m.

No Price Tag, No Date — Yet

The April 7 referendum failed by 302 votes, 52% to 48%. The package would have funded renovations to Cumberland and Richards elementary schools, the high school, and Lydell Community Center, along with a new middle school, the proposal’s most controversial element. Critics objected to the plan to build on Armory Park and to the cost: roughly $1,800 per year added to the property tax bill of the average Whitefish Bay homeowner for 21 years.

As of tonight’s meeting, there is no new referendum package, no price tag, no confirmed ballot date. November 2026 remains in play (and the mostly likely option), as does Spring 2027. In my own observations it appears clear from recent board discussions that the board is prioritizing solving the middle school problem on the top of their list. Members have consistently pointed to the age and condition of the middle school as the district’s most pressing facilities challenge. There appears to be a genuine lean toward a new build over renovation-in-place, driven in part by the disruption that multi-year construction inside an occupied building would cause to students and staff. A few options have been floated, but no leading proposal has emerged.

The Plan for This Summer: Bring In a Facilitator

A central item on tonight’s agenda is the district’s search for an independent, third-party facilitator to design and lead interactive community sessions in June and July. The stated goal is to help residents work through the trade-offs between renovation and new construction, ensure a transparent and data-driven dialogue on potential November 2026 options, and ultimately give the board a clear synthesis of community priorities to guide whatever comes next.

On the Topic of Messaging

The board has also discussed hiring a marketing consultant to help communicate the case for a future referendum. That seems a reasonable step. Explaining complex facilities needs to a broad community audience takes real skill, and professional help with that kind of communication is hardly unusual.

One friendly note from the WFBBuzz corner, though: in discussing the idea, the phrase “crisis communications” crept into the conversation. It’s worth gently setting that framing aside. The district isn’t in a crisis — it’s in a planning process. Framing community outreach as crisis PR, even internally, sets the wrong tone before the conversation even begins. Call it what it is: community education and engagement. Residents will respond better to that, and frankly, so will the board.

Also on Tonight’s Agenda: A Closed Session on a Federal Lawsuit Settlement

The board is also expected to enter into a closed session tonight to discuss a potential settlement in White et al v. Whitefish Bay School Board et al, a federal civil rights lawsuit filed in 2024 by Shaneeka White on behalf of her son (“K.K.”), a black high school student.

The case stems from a series of incidents during the student’s freshman year in the 2023-24 school year. At its core, the lawsuit alleged that district administrators responded very differently to K.K. than to the white students involved in the same incidents and that this disparity was rooted in racial bias.

The central incident involved the homecoming parade in September 2023, where K.K. was involved in an altercation with two white students who allegedly insulted and shoved him. The high school principal, acting on an account from those students, called police and ultimately had K.K. barred from the homecoming dance and game before K.K. had been given a chance to tell his side of the story. He was later given a 3-day suspension. The lawsuit also alleged that district administrators repeatedly refused to address months of harassment K.K. had faced from another student, citing off-campus timing, while allegedly handling similar complaints involving white students more responsively.

Federal Magistrate Judge Nancy Joseph ruled last April that several of the claims were strong enough to proceed. She allowed the case to move forward, finding the complaint sufficiently alleged that the two administrators who suspended K.K. may have prejudged his guilt and citing the alleged disparity in how black and white students were treated in both disciplinary and harassment situations.

The potential settlement of this case is on tonight’s agenda for discussion in a closed session.

The Whitefish Bay School Board meeting begins tonight at 5:30 p.m.