San Angelo ISD presents $402 million facilities plan; board weighs split-proposition and timing options

San Angelo Independent School District officials on Monday presented a citizens‑committee bond proposal of roughly $402 million that would fund safety and security upgrades, a replacement for Glenn Middle School, major renovations and additions at Central and Lakeview high schools, continued phases at Fannin and McGill elementaries, a cafeteria replacement at Crockett Elementary and districtwide capital renewal.

The project list, prepared by Park Hill Architects and the district’s citizens advisory committee, was summarized by Alan Wolf of Park Hill Architects. Wolf said the package is broken into five categories—safety/security, new construction, additions/renovations, capital renewal and athletic facility improvements—and “the proposal that you’re going to see this evening … is really a proposal by the committee and for your citizens and your students.”

Why it matters: the district has aging campuses and deferred maintenance; the committee prioritized projects with a super‑majority vote. Board and staff are weighing how to present the work to voters: one single proposition of roughly $397–402 million, or split propositions (roughly $281 million for Proposition A and $122 million for Proposition B in one option) so some projects could be voted on separately.

Hilltop Securities’ Jeff Robert walked trustees through financing scenarios intended to meet construction cash‑flow needs while limiting tax‑rate shock. Robert said a possible two‑step issuance—$275 million issued immediately and $123 million issued in 2027—was modeled on a 25‑year amortization and a 4.5% interest assumption. The presentation included an assumption of conservative tax‑base growth (1% annually for 10 years, then 0.5%), and Robert said the district’s maximum interest & sinking (I&S) tax rate under the modeled full package would be roughly a 28–29 cent increase over current I&S, yielding about a $35.60 monthly cost estimate for the average homestead under the single‑proposition scenario.

EdVantage Marketing (remote) presented voter turnout and polling takeaways. Travis Cram, director of client experience, noted turnout patterns: low‑turnout May elections are heavily skewed toward voters aged 50+, and only a small share of younger voters typically appear. Cram said polling had shown a cost‑sensitivity breakpoint in the high‑20s per month; for that reason, proponents are considering splitting projects so the immediate monthly tax impact is lower per proposition (presentations cited about $24.10/month for a Proposition A alone and $11.54/month for a separate Proposition B in one scenario).

Board discussion and next steps: Wolf and Robert emphasized choices remain—how to group projects, whether to remove an estimated $6 million in Glenn locker‑room work from the main package (which would reduce the immediate ask below $400 million), and how to sequence issuance. Trustees asked about risks from inflation and whether splitting propositions can reduce passage probability; Robert said historically splitting non‑extracurricular campus projects into many a la carte propositions tends to lower passage rates, while targeted splits (for example when a proposition is conditional on a future tax base change) can be used strategically.

What’s next: staff and architects said further detailed cost verification and drafting of ballot language would follow; the board signaled it will receive additional financial detail and polling analysis in a coming meeting before formally approving an election order.

Ending: The presentations gave trustees technical and political options but no formal vote was taken Monday. The citizens advisory committee recommendation, Park Hill’s site plans and Hilltop’s financing scenarios will return to the board for further direction before an election is set.