Kimberly School District trustees and administrators gathered Thursday evening to assess the resounding defeat of two ballot measures that went before voters on May 19. The proposed $57.8 million bond and $5 million levy both failed by wide margins, drawing sharp criticism from residents who packed the meeting.
Trustee Chad Allen acknowledged the unexpected intensity of community opposition during the board session. Allen said he did not anticipate the level of anger and frustration expressed by residents in the wake of the election. He told fellow board members he was uncertain about what the community values after the decisive vote.
Overwhelming Defeat at the Polls
The bond measure needed 67 percent approval to pass but received only 14 percent support from voters—a rejection ratio of roughly 7-1. The funds would have financed construction of a fine arts center and auditorium, an additional gymnasium, a community field house, and new athletic fields.
The plant-facilities levy required 55 percent approval but garnered just 35 percent of the vote. That measure would have provided funding for ongoing building maintenance across district facilities.
Kimberly resident Steve Long addressed the board during public comment, declaring that the election represented a victory for the community. Long characterized the bond as irresponsible and said residents clearly rejected what they viewed as excessive spending.
Trustees Question Lack of Feedback During Planning Process
Board members expressed frustration over what they described as minimal community engagement during two years of bond planning. Trustee Zachary Kelsey noted a stark contrast between participation levels on the bond and on cultural issues that have drawn large crowds to previous meetings.
Kelsey said the board received virtually no feedback during the lengthy planning process, only to be labeled irresponsible after the vote. He compared the silence to past instances when mentioning topics like mask policies or transgender issues prompted hundreds of residents to attend meetings.
Board Clerk Cassandra Searby reported the district received only two phone calls and one email from community members seeking information about the bond before the election. Searby encouraged residents to contact district officials directly rather than relying on social media discussions.
Trustee Leah Meeks said more feedback arrived after the bond was already on the ballot and could no longer be modified. She noted that two committees—a long-term planning group and a building committee—had developed the proposals, but few residents outside those committees voiced opinions until voting was underway.
Internal Disagreement on Ballot Strategy
Superintendent Luke Schroeder said extensive discussion took place among trustees regarding what to place before voters. The building committee presented two bond options, and the board selected the higher amount. Schroeder said he has consistently heard requests over his 14 years as superintendent for an auditorium and expanded sports complex including baseball and softball fields.
Allen acknowledged that while residents may want those facilities, securing funding remains the central challenge. He described $58 million as a substantial sum and said the board could have declined to move forward with the proposal.
Kelsey recalled that Schroeder voiced concerns multiple times during deliberations about running both a levy and a bond simultaneously. Kelsey said board members at the time believed the community would evaluate each measure separately and pass them, but that assumption proved incorrect.
Trustee Emilie Carlson framed the election outcome as democracy functioning properly. She said voters were given a voice on how taxpayer money would be spent, and they exercised that voice decisively.
Misinformation Concerns Following Meeting
Schroeder told reporters Friday that misinformation about the board meeting began circulating online before he arrived home Thursday night. One social media comment claimed the board planned to place another bond before voters in November, though trustees only discussed the recent election results during the meeting.
The superintendent said district officials are frustrated by false narratives spreading through online groups. He indicated some community members have lost faith in the district and board because of inaccurate information on social media platforms.
Schroeder said the experience has shown him the changed media landscape and raised questions about how school districts can effectively communicate accurate information to residents.
What Comes Next
The board did not announce plans for future bond or levy attempts during Thursday’s meeting. District officials will need to determine whether to pursue facility improvements through a revised ballot measure or explore alternative funding mechanisms. The failed levy leaves questions about how the district will address ongoing building maintenance needs without the additional revenue stream voters rejected.
Community relations between the district and residents remain strained following the election, with both sides expressing frustration over communication breakdowns during the planning process. Trustees and administrators face the challenge of rebuilding trust while addressing facility needs the board maintains are still present.