Voters probably will be asked for a record-setting sum to pay for public education in Colorado this year.
Nearly $4 billion worth of bond issues and mill levy overrides to fund capital improvements, buttress technology purchases and beef up staffing at hundreds of schools statewide could end up on the November ballot, according to data provided by the Colorado School Finance Project.
While some of the funding measures are still in the discussion stage and may not make it to the election, 2016 should set a record for the most money sought for school funding in Colorado’s history — eclipsing the nearly $2.7 billion districts requested from voters eight years ago.
Taken alone, Jefferson County and Denver — the state’s two largest school districts with a combined enrollment topping 177,000 students — will ask voters for nearly $1.2 billion in funding to build new schools and fix hundreds of others. In total, 34 school districts across Colorado will send, or are discussing sending, funding measures to the ballot in November.
“It’s an active year,” said Tracie Rainey, CSFP’s executive director. “I think the pent-up demand and need is the main driving force.”
That demand and need is in large part the result of diminished funding from the state, which since 2010 has invoked the “negative factor,” a budgetary maneuver that allows it to pay school districts less than the state’s funding formula mandates. The CSFP estimates that the negative factor has dropped Colorado to 40th place in the nation in per-pupil spending, whereas it would rank 28th without it.
Coupled with the state’s booming population — Colorado was recently ranked the second-fastest-growing state in the United States from 2014 to 2015 — Rainey said conditions are ripe for massive budget challenges in multiple districts.
“The compounding effect of the loss of revenue from the state and increased enrollment, along with the increased cost of doing business, puts extreme pressure on school districts,” she said. “That’s why you’re seeing districts going for elections.”
David Hart, who served as chief financial officer for Denver and Douglas County public school districts and is now a director at municipal advisory firm PFM, said the facts that the economy has recovered significantly in the past few years, interest rates remain low and this year is a presidential election year, with higher expected voter turnout, are making the prospect of asking taxpayers for money more likely to succeed.
“When you don’t attend to those needs, it creates a certain amount of angst among parents and teachers,” Hart said. “That makes it pretty compelling to a school board to put a package before the voters.”
Compelling enough for the Jefferson County School Board last week to put two measures — a $535 million bond issue and a $33 million mill levy override — on the fall ballot. Superintendent Dan McMinimee said it wasn’t a decision the 86,000-student district made lightly.
“This is a big ask, there’s no question,” he said.
The district held 12 public meetings and two telephone town halls and ran a survey on its website to gauge voters’ collective stomach for the proposal, which would cost the owner of a $300,000 home nearly $150 a year in additional property tax and a business owner more than $540 annually on that same property value.
Despite that groundwork, McMinimee knows that a yes vote is not at all assured. Jefferson County voters roundly rejected a $384 million school bond measure in 2008, and about three-quarters of households in the district don’t have children in school. That means arguments like the benefits of a well-educated labor pool and preservation of property values will have to be convincingly made alongside traditional appeals to parents of K-12 kids.
“We better be demonstrating value to them,” McMinimee said.
Proponents of Jefferson County’s fundraising efforts plan a “very aggressive” campaign on behalf of the measures, said Bill Bottoms, who volunteers with Citizens for Jeffco Schools. That includes door-to-door canvassing and a new website and Facebook page, both of which were scheduled to launch Friday.
“We have not invested in any new classrooms for a very long time,” Bottoms said.
The money from the Jefferson County bond issue will be used to build three new elementary schools and replace four other schools, in addition to renovating or building additions at 45 schools, and repairing and updating 110 schools in the 154-school district. The average age of a building in Jefferson County is 45 years.
Money from the mill levy override would pay for school counselors and increase per-pupil funding in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) programs, while also covering funding gaps should the state reduce funding.
Opposition is sure to crop up. Several residents already have spoken out against the taxing measures. At the Jefferson County school board meeting last week, Golden resident Tom Coyne asked the board whether it had truly looked into whether additional revenues will result in higher academic achievement.
“Can you really claim to be good stewards of the taxpayers’ hard-earned money, much less ethically ask them for more?” he said.
Jon Caldara, of the free-market think tank Independence Institute, recommended caution about school districts borrowing at such high levels. Calling districts and bond dealers “a match made in heaven,” Caldara said those who will bear the debt burden of borrowing decisions made today are future generations.
“(School districts) are swimming underwater, and now they’re going to swim further underwater with this debt,” he said.
Officials with the 21,000-student Greeley-Evans School District 6 used a citizen advisory committee to determine the best way to structure its mill levy measure.
District spokeswoman Theresa Myers said placing a seven-year sunset on the measure, which is expected to bring in $12 million during its first year and pay for safety and security measures and the recruitment and retention of quality staff, was determined to be the best way to win over a community that is generally “cautious and conservative” on new taxes. Voters in the district rejected a property tax increase in 2009.
“The committee thought it would be more palatable to the community (with the sunset),” Myers said.
Other districts, particularly Denver and Boulder, tend to experience less resistance from voters when it comes to funding requests. Just two years ago, Boulder Valley School District voters passed the largest school bond measure in state history — $576.5 million.
Sixty-two projects are underway, with three replacement schools and one new school under construction. Superintendent Bruce Messinger said other schools are getting roofs replaced, windows and doors replaced, and plumbing, electrical, carpeting and flooring overhauled.
“All 56 BVSD schools will have improvements as a result of the bond issue,” he said.
New schools are planned for the fast-growing Stapleton and far northeast neighborhoods of Denver under the district’s $572 million proposed bond measure. Revenues from a $56.6 million mill levy override would pay for high-quality teachers, college and career readiness, early literacy, and classroom technology.
District CFO Mark Ferrandino said the bond issue will be an easier sell to voters because it won’t raise property taxes. The mill levy request, on the other hand, will boost taxes by nearly $10 a month on a median-priced Denver home ($329,000).
“The campaign is going to have to figure out that message,” Ferrandino said.
Rainey, of the Colorado School Finance Project, said it will come down to making the message as clear as possible — and the argument as compelling as possible.
“If districts have done a good job of talking about what their need is, the impact of the negative factor and the conditions of their facilities,” she said, “then they will have a much better chance of being successful.”
