There have been many Facebook posts on April 8 regarding the results of the April 7 Spring Election and the failure of the Iola-Scandinavia School District referendum. Here is a gathering of those remarks.
In the aftermath of the Iola-Scandinavia School District referendum failing, District Administrator Chris Nelson indicated, “While I am disappointed, I respect the voters’ decision. The reality is that our budget deficit will not be going away — we will need to make difficult cuts to align our spending with available revenue. Moving forward, we’ll be exploring the reasons for this outcome and working to understand what future non-recurring operational referendums might be acceptable to our community. Our focus remains on maintaining educational quality for our students while being responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars.”
As to the possibility of another referendum in November, he stressed, “I cannot speak for the board regarding the timing or structure of any future referendum. What I can say is that the need for additional operational revenue is critical. We will be analyzing the results of this vote, engaging with our community to better understand their concerns, and working with the board to determine the best path forward.”
The reaction of School Board President Mike Harbridge is a separate article.
Voter reactions
Residents of the Iola-Scandinavia School District expressed a mix of frustration, calls for accountability, and concerns about the community’s future after voters rejected a multi-million-dollar referendum.
The failed measure drew sharp reactions online, with some Facebook users decrying the outcome as shortsighted while others defended the “no” vote as a necessary stand against rising costs and poor management.
J.M.M. wrote that seeing people “laugh at the outcome of something that impacts our schools, our kids, and the future of this community is incredibly frustrating.” The user argued the vote was not a joke but concerned the long-term health of the town, warning that strong schools attract families, which in turn support businesses and the local economy. “This isn’t funny,” J.M.M. added. “It’s serious. And it mattered to a lot of us in this town.”
Several users pointed to a lack of visible results from past funding as a key factor in the defeat. P.L. said the reason it was voted down was because “when people continuously vote yes they don’t see improvements,” adding that many wanted to “physically see what they paid for.”
Others tied the rejection to broader financial pressures on local families. J.R. wrote that high property taxes were deterring families, noting that friends in Green Bay paid less for comparable housing. The user questioned what the Iola schools offered that was superior to surrounding districts such as Amherst, Waupaca or Stevens Point, saying they had “less in fact.”
K.W. called for greater “accountability of where the money is spent” and fiscal responsibility from the district. “I need more information prior to just giving more of my income to them,” K.W. wrote, comparing school budgeting to a family budget and urging officials to explain efforts to stay within existing funds before seeking more.
Another resident, also named J.R., described the community as struggling financially after recent property tax increases. “Iola is not filled with wealthy people,” the user wrote. “A lot of us are struggling just to pay bills.” The comment highlighted stagnant wages, inflation, fuel costs, and limited local employment that forces many to commute. “We are tapped out,” the user said.
Critics of the “no” vote warned of potential long-term consequences. A.J. wrote that rejecting the referendum “doesn’t magically save money or fix anything” but instead leaves the district with less funding, potentially leading to cuts in teachers, programs and larger class sizes. Over time, the user argued, fewer families could mean declining home values and higher taxes spread among remaining residents.
C.B. agreed the town’s health was in “poor shape,” citing a decline he attributed to village leadership pushing businesses away and the school district shifting priorities. The user said the vote represented the public speaking out “not against the school but against how the school is managed.” C.B. urged greater involvement in local government, saying “true involvement isn’t one meeting in every five years” but requires constant engagement.
Supporters of the schools expressed disappointment and a commitment to continue helping despite the outcome. C.P. called it “sad to see a small town that is so against helping their schools and children,” noting the referendum’s cost was modest compared with what many spend on alcohol. The user said the community would keep donating necessities to teachers “even those with parents whom are against this referendum, because that’s what a community does.”
J.E.K. pushed back, suggesting blame should fall on parents rather than taxpayers and questioning how much more residents could be expected to give after previous “yes” votes. “Tighten the belt and learn to live with what you get like we all have to,” J.E.K. wrote.
In the end, the Facebook discussion reflected deep divisions over the role of schools in a small community’s survival, with residents on all sides expressing concern for Iola’s future while differing sharply on the path forward.
