Candidates for the School District of Iola-Scandinavia Board have answered questions presented by this news source.
Incumbents Laura Krogwold for the Towns of Iola and Scandinavia and Vanessa Kirmse for the Village of Scandinavia are the only candidates on the April 7 ballot. Their term will be for three years.
Answers to the questions are verbatim of what each candidate submitted.
Beyond general commitment to the community, what concrete experience, decision-making track record, and leadership qualities do you possess that better prepare you for this position than your opponents?
Laura Krogwold (LK): Beyond my commitment to this community, I bring hands‑on experience making tough decisions, managing projects, and leading through challenges. I take a hands-on approach to decision making and take responsibility when the stakes are high. My leadership style is collaborative because the best outcomes come from listening to different perspectives and using those viewpoints to coming up with a collaborative solution. I communicate clearly, I follow through, and I hold myself accountable. These aren’t just values I talk about — they’re habits I’ve practiced in every role I’ve held.
Vanessa Kirmse (VK): I am running unopposed in this election, however, one of the reasons I think I am a good candidate for the school board is the fact that I have children who have went through this school system, and I also was employed by the school district for nine years, so I have seen multiple sides of the district.
With open enrollment available to families, what specific policies, programs, or measurable improvements would you propose to attract and retain students in our district, and how would you evaluate whether those efforts are working?
LK: Open enrollment is an option available to families. I understand that families have different viewpoints as to what a school should offer. I feel that Iola-Scandinavia has a great offering to students by focusing on the overall student needs. This can be tracked by our strong school report card, student achievements, and the many recognitions earned across our programs. Our continued growth and positive momentum make our district a place where students want to be.
VK: Open enrollment has been available for many years, and some students who reside in our district have never even walked through our doors. I believe the improvements that have made seen in the school report card makes our district stand out among others in the area. These improvements are a result of many things, curriculum being one of them, which I believe will continue to show that Iola-Scandinavia is committed to student success. Our business program, and youth apprenticeship program are assets to our students and their future success. We have many students who take dual credit classes through surrounding colleges, providing them with tuition relief in their post-secondary education.
The School District of Iola-Scandinavia is currently proposing a four-year operational referendum (seeking to exceed revenue limits by $1.6 million initially, then $2 million annually through 2029-30) to avoid cuts to programs, staff, class sizes, extracurriculars, and maintenance. What is your position on this referendum, and how would you balance the need for sustainable funding with taxpayer concerns in our rural community, especially given Wisconsin’s stagnant state aid and reliance on local referendums?
LK: I support the Iola‑Scandinavia operational referendum because currently it’s the only way to maintain the programs, staff, and class sizes our children deserve. This request isn’t about adding new services — it’s about keeping the district from cutting what already exists. With state aid in Wisconsin failing to keep pace with inflation, more than half of districts now rely on referendums just to operate, and ours is no exception. Our referendum is one of many taxpayers around the state will be considering this April. This situation the state legislation has put schools in is not right. Just because we are a school district doesn’t mean we are exempt from increasing costs and services. Our children are our future of our community, we need to invest in them.
At the same time, taxpayers deserve accountability. The district makes it clear during our annual and monthly meetings how money is spent, and we develop a long‑term financial forecasting. We make our decisions based on student needs and keep our budget in mind.
Strong schools are essential to the health of rural communities. They support property values, attract families, and provide stability. Passing this referendum protects those benefits, but pairing it with transparency and long‑range planning protects taxpayer trust.
VK: The Iola Scandinavia school district’s decision to go to referendum was not something that was undertaken lightly. The school board is aware of the current financial pressures, as we are also experiencing these same pressures. This need is caused by stagnant state aid, inflation and declining enrollment. There are less teachers and larger class sizes than in years past due to the cost saving decisions already made by this district. I believe that the clear improvements in student outcomes that the district has been able to show through state reporting shows the district is committed to ensuring that the funds they collect are justified and tied to student outcomes. We all benefit from an educated society, and having a strong thriving local school district helps our properties retain their value.
The proposed April 2026 referendum would allow the district to exceed revenue limits by $1.6 million in the first year and $2 million annually thereafter through 2029-30, building on previous referendums approved in 2016 and 2020 to maintain programs and staffing. What is your stance on this measure, and how would you communicate its necessity to voters while addressing concerns about property tax increases (e.g., an estimated $63–$126 rise for a $100,000–$200,000 property in the first year)?
LK: I’m a taxpayer just like everyone else who will be voting, so I understand the concerns. I also care deeply about our community and about giving our students the services and education they deserve. They are our future.
One thing taxpayers should keep in mind is that even though the referendum asks for permission to exceed revenue limits by $1.6 million in the first year and $2 million annually through 2029–30, that doesn’t mean the district will automatically take the full amount. When we sit down to build the budget, we always look at how every decision affects the overall tax rate. That’s a responsibility we take seriously.
We also already have an operating referendum in place. So when I think about my own vote, I look at the estimated impact — for example, the projected $63–$126 increase for a $100,000–$200,000 property in the first year. For me, that works out to roughly $5.25 to $10.50 a month on top of what I already pay in school taxes. And I’m willing to make that investment to maintain the quality of education Iola‑Scandinavia provides for our kids and for the future of our community.
VK: See answer in previous question.
In the district’s Facebook posting about the referendum, it states: “Without an approved referendum, our district will be forced to consider additional spending cuts, including eliminating some programs and services for students, reducing staff, limiting or eliminating extracurricular activities, and delaying maintenance.” I’ve heard/seen this same phraseology in previous referendums without specifics. Voters deserve to know what they won’t have and what they will have left if the referendum doesn’t pass. Can you please specifically identify what programs and services you think could be cut, what a staff reduction could look like by grade, which extracurricular activities could be limited and/or eliminated, and which maintenance projects could be delayed?
LK: Operating referendums are stressful for everyone involved. If a referendum doesn’t pass, it will mean reductions in services for our students and the loss of jobs this community doesn’t need. Out of respect for our students, our staff, and our community, I’m not willing to list specific programs or services that might be cut. Those decisions would only be made after the voters have spoken and official action taken by the school board, and only after considering many factors — including state regulations, state aid, staffing, and student needs.
VK: I see challenges ahead if this referendum does not pass. There will be less programs, and less opportunities for our students. The opportunities provided for students now are widely used and having a positive impact, so any cuts made will be felt by students and staff. Our business program teacher has recently indicated that they will not be returning next year. This is a widely popular program that would be in jeopardy if we cannot replace this teacher.
If the April 2026 referendum fails, forcing cuts to staff, class sizes, or activities, how would you approach long-term alternatives like consolidation with neighboring Waupaca County districts (e.g., Waupaca or Weyauwega-Fremont) or pushing for state-level reforms to increase aid for rural schools, ensuring the district remains viable without repeated referendums?
LK: With where Iola‑Scandinavia is located, consolidating with another district would be extremely difficult. The transportation costs alone would be a major barrier, not to mention the impact on students who would face much longer bus rides and the added burden to families to have a school farther away from their homes.
We are currently pushing for state-level reforms to increase aid for rural schools, to reduce reliance on recurring referendums. Many Wisconsin districts argue that current funding formulas and revenue limits no longer reflect current rural or economic realities. Increased state aid, higher revenue caps, or more support for smaller family sizes that led to declining‑enrollment districts are among the changes lawmakers in Madison need to take into consideration.
VK: I have not been involved in any discussions where consolidation has been seriously considered. This is rarely in the best interest of students and communities.
Recent Wisconsin legislation (passed in late 2025) provides financial incentives like $2,000 per pupil in one-time aid to encourage school district consolidations as a response to statewide enrollment drops and fiscal challenges. In Waupaca County, where districts like Iola-Scandinavia, Waupaca, and Clintonville operate independently, would you support exploring consolidation options, and what criteria (e.g., cost savings, educational quality, or community input) would guide your decision?
LK: A one‑time $2,000 per‑pupil incentive to encourage district consolidation might sound like a good solution on paper, especially with statewide enrollment declines and financial pressures. But for a district like Iola‑Scandinavia, consolidation would be extremely challenging. Our location alone makes it difficult. It’s hard to imagine a consolidation that wouldn’t affect the quality of our students’ learning environment or increase the workload on staff. Those are real impacts that can’t be ignored when talking about what’s best for our community.
VK: I would certainly be open to having discussions on any path that might need to be considered moving forward, I am not open to committing to any path without serious discussions and study.
Declining enrollment is a significant challenge for many rural Wisconsin districts, including ours, where we’ve managed costs through attrition, consolidated roles, and not filling certain positions. How would you approach enrollment trends, such as attracting and retaining families through open enrollment, program enhancements, or community partnerships, while continuing to control expenses without compromising educational quality?
LK: If you look at our school report card I feel that we are very strong with our educational offerings. My husband and I went to neighboring schools, but we chose to move here because of the school and what Iola had to offer. I am a huge supporter of working together to support the community and its members, through personal accountability for our actions. Kindness and support toward each other is a huge selling point to attract families to our area.
VK: We are in a unique position where declining enrollment is causing a hardship with our fiscal outlook, but the enrollment is still high enough, where the services we are providing are still needed and hard to cut. We need to continue to provide a quality education to attract students to our area.
Our district has earned recognition for exceeding expectations on state report cards, reflecting strong academic outcomes despite limited resources. What specific strategies would you prioritize to maintain and build on this success, particularly in areas like early literacy, STEM offerings, mental health support, or addressing teacher shortages in specialized subjects common in rural areas?
LK: A huge shout‑out to our staff for the work they do with our students every day. They’re the ones who take the resources available to them, put them into action, and adjust when something isn’t working. Teachers collaborate with one another, in our district and others districts, share ideas, on programs or curriculum that have proven to be effective and well‑supported.
Listening to our staff, understanding their needs, and staying informed about what’s happening in classrooms is how a successful school district is built. Their insight and dedication are what keep our students growing and our schools strong.
VK: Our district has been performing well academically as seen on our state report card. There have been recent changes in both math and reading curriculum which I believe will continue to support and grow our students in noticeable ways.
Rural school districts like Iola-Scandinavia face unique staffing challenges, including difficulty attracting educators to the area, especially in math, science, and special education, amid a statewide teacher shortage. How would you support teacher recruitment, retention, professional development, and competitive compensation within our budget constraints?
LK: When we have a vacancy, we post it as quickly as possible. We keep a close eye on what other districts are offering so we can stay competitive and retain the great staff we already have. Supporting our employees through professional development and fair, competitive compensation is key to keeping strong educators here — and attracting new ones.
Every year, the budget plays a major role in these decisions. We have to work within our financial limits, and we take that responsibility seriously. Balancing competitive pay with our overall budget is part of maintaining a stable, sustainable district.
VK: I believe our district is doing well with recruiting and retaining teachers. We watch the trends at other schools and try to stay competitive with wages and benefits to retail high quality staff.
Balancing fiscal responsibility with student needs is critical in a small rural district — such as preserving extracurricular activities, transportation, nutrition programs, and facility upkeep while navigating rising operational costs and potential future facility needs. What policies or approaches would you advocate to ensure long-term financial stability and high-quality education for our students, including any advocacy for broader state funding reforms?
LK: Every month, the school board reviews where budget stands. We also look at projected costs and where our overall budget is expected to land by the end of the fiscal year. Our administrative staff is constantly negotiating and seeking better pricing on services so we can stay within our budget constraints.
Myself and all taxpayers should be advocating for a better school‑funding formula. One that keeps pace with inflation and reflects the realities districts face today. Hopefully a more stable, updated funding model would reduce the need for ongoing operational referendums and give schools the consistency they need to plan responsibly for the future.
VK: I believe our district has been doing well planning for long-term financial stability. If the state had continued to fund schools on pace with inflation, we would not be needing to ask for this referendum. That to me indicates that we have been in line fiscally. We need to prioritize core academic programs and avoid reactive budgeting.
With Iola-Scandinavia facing ongoing budget pressures from stagnant state aid, rising costs, and enrollment declines (similar to other rural districts), how would you ensure the referendum funds are allocated transparently — such as prioritizing academic programs, extracurriculars, mental health support, or facility maintenance — without leading to future dependency on voter-approved overrides?
LK: This is always a tough balance. We want to give our kids everything they need, but we also have to be mindful of each department’s needs and our financial limits. Our current budget model is working, and it’s posted on the school website and reviewed at monthly meetings for anyone who wants to see it. If people have questions, the district is always willing to help. Until the state updates its funding formula to keep pace with real costs, operating referendums will continue to be part of how we maintain essential services.
VK: The district is very transparent in the use of referendum funds. The budget and everyday expenses are always available in the posted agendas. I think that this is something that needs to continue to continue having the trust of the community.
Consolidation could potentially merge resources across Waupaca County districts to address shared issues like teacher shortages and program cuts, but it risks losing local control and identity in small communities like Iola and Scandinavia. How would you balance these trade-offs, and what role should the board play in studying or advocating for such changes amid incentives from bills like those proposing statewide consolidation reviews?
LK: Balancing the idea of consolidation with the realities of a small rural district like Iola‑Scandinavia is complicated. District Administrators meet regularly to address the challenges districts are dealing with. By opening the lines of communication and knowing how the educational system works, there may be an overall solution. However, there’s a lot of pride in being a T‑Bird, and consolidation would mean losing part of that identity. At the same time, it’s important to stay open to ideas and look at options thoughtfully. The priority will always be finding solutions that support students, families, and staff without sacrificing what makes this community strong.
VK: I don’t think consolidation is a good answer for our district, but, just like any decision, all options need to be studied and looked at so there is a clear understanding of the risks and challenges of the path ahead.
Any other statement you would like to make?
LK: None.
VK: The decisions we make now will shape opportunities for students and the strength of our community for years to come. I am committed to thoughtful leadership, transparent communication, and making decisions that put students first while also respecting taxpayers.
