Caleb Bonjour.

Sun Courier Note: The following letter written by Superintendent Caleb Bonjour was shared by the Gladbrook-Reinbeck Community School District on Saturday, Jan. 31, 2026, on social media. The newspaper is printing the letter in its entirety below.

I became aware of a recent post that was critical of the district, the Board, and our staff, including myself. While I understand that facility projects, finances, and governance decisions can create strong emotions and differing perspectives, I feel as though the framing of this post moves beyond disagreement and into speculation that implies mishandling or irresponsibility.

I do not find enjoyment in engaging in long back-and-forths like this, but when speculation begins to shape a narrative that implies mishandling or irresponsibility, it’s important to step in and clarify the facts.

So I want to do that clearly, calmly, and then move on more productively.

To start, it’s important to explain what it actually means when a project comes in under estimate and why that benefits our district and our taxpayers. When the Elementary SAVE project bids came in under the original estimate, it created flexibility, not excess. That flexibility allows the district to rely more on bond proceeds than originally anticipated and preserve more of our SAVE funds for other allowable facility needs. Hypothetically, that means we are better positioned to support future playground work, additional flooring replacements, security upgrades, deferred maintenance, or help offset costs at the junior/senior high building. That is what responsible, long-term facility planning looks like.

The Elementary remodel is also more complex than what was fully designed by Sitelogiq alone. In addition to the core remodel, the project includes site work in preparation for a new playground, corridor flooring being addressed to reduce long-term maintenance costs, and furniture and technology installation that the district is completing internally specifically to save money. Our original scope also did not include replacing all classroom entrances, which we are now planning to do simultaneously to avoid higher costs and future disruption. These are not “extras.” They are thoughtful, forward-looking decisions made within allowable uses of bond funds.

When “enhancements” are discussed, that conversation is about whether previously deferred items can be addressed more efficiently while contractors are already mobilized. A simple example is classroom storage. If the overall budget allows, built-in cabinetry may replace shelving above counters. That is not frivolous spending. It is a functional improvement that supports staff and students for decades. Being under estimate does not mean there is “extra money to spend.” It means the district can make informed scope decisions without sacrificing other priorities.

Regarding the reference to a $12 million estimate for the junior/senior high project, that figure does not reflect the current planning reality. The estimated project cost is approximately $16.8 million.

The district pursued $17.3 million because that was the maximum allowable and provided flexibility given construction cost volatility, bonding timelines, and interest rates. Even with that authorization, the district’s current bonding capacity may not allow us to reach the full amount, meaning scope adjustments are more likely than additions. Authorization sets a ceiling, not a target.

The implication that this will lead to unchecked “enhancement creep” is speculative and does not reflect how these projects are managed. The types of items discussed are things like improved door hardware or fixture upgrades when safety, durability, or long-term function are involved. No one is proposing luxury finishes or unnecessary additions. Framing these discussions as reckless spending misrepresents both the process and the intent.

Regarding meeting notices and agendas, the notice for the public hearing was published in the district’s official newspaper as required. The agenda itself was posted approximately 25 hours prior to the meeting, which meets and exceeds the 24-hour requirement under Iowa Code. We strive to post agendas earlier whenever possible, but like many districts, we balance multiple deadlines and responsibilities. In this case, other items took priority and agenda posting was pushed later than usual. That is not ideal, and we will continue to work to get agendas posted as early as we can going forward.

Iowa Code requires agendas to be posted at the building and in the office, which was done. Posting agendas online is something we do as a best practice, even though it is not legally required. A Facebook inquiry did not trigger compliance. It was a confirmation.

On virtual access, Iowa Code does not require livestreaming or virtual attendance options. We provide them as a courtesy to increase transparency and access. Many districts have discontinued livestreaming entirely due to misuse or misrepresentation. We continue to offer it when possible. In this case, a request was made and accommodated using the same YouTube link we use for all livestreamed meetings. Optional transparency should not be reframed as a failure.

Concerns about Central Office staffing and costs also deserve accurate context. There has been a long-standing need for additional support in our central office to meet evolving expectations and requirements. Through the use of sharing opportunities, the district has added approximately 1.2 FTE in Central Office and leadership roles. These positions have brought greater stability to our office, increased support for our leadership team, and improved our ability to meet expanding state and federal requirements. This is especially important as districts are navigating a new landscape with significantly less support from the AEA than in the past while still being expected to implement new mandates and reporting requirements. As the demands of the work have evolved, we have been intentional about building a structure that allows us to better support staff, maintain balance, and improve retention, while also being mindful of cost and efficiency.

The repeated focus on the Superintendent “doing clerical work” also needs clarification. Developing board agendas is a superintendent responsibility. Typing and distributing them is often the most efficient way to ensure accuracy and timeliness. When a staff member is unavailable for a meeting due to personal or family commitments, stepping in to take notes avoids unnecessary rescheduling and supports continuity. The official minutes are still prepared, maintained, and approved through proper channels.

Responding thoughtfully and thoroughly to posts like this requires significant time and energy. Time spent drafting detailed responses, gathering context, and clarifying facts is time not spent on budget planning, facility work, staff support, program development, or being present in classrooms with students and teachers. While I believe transparency matters, it is not sustainable or responsible to treat every speculative or frustration-driven post as something that requires a public, point-by-point response.

Nothing improper occurred. Nothing was hidden. Processes were followed, requirements were met, and decisions were made in good faith with students, staff, and taxpayers in mind. Yet the framing often implies that something must have been done wrong. That implication, repeated often enough, becomes exhausting and discouraging for the people doing the work.

Transparency does not mean perfection. Accountability does not mean assuming bad intent. And responsible governance does not require responding to every instance of misconstrued frustration.

Going forward, I will continue to address concerns that raise legitimate questions of misappropriation, misconduct, or compliance. However, I will not make it a common practice to engage in ongoing public back-and-forths driven by implication, assumption, or repeated reframing of lawful decisions as wrongdoing. That approach is not productive for the district, for our staff, or for the broader community.

I remain confident in the thoughtful, good-faith work being done by our Board and staff, and I appreciate the continued engagement and care people have for this district as we move forward together.