Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant and district staff outline district finances: assessed value, mills, debt and options
Summary
A Stevens Inc. consultant and Little Rock School District finance staff on Sept. 11 reviewed the district’s assessed value, tax mills, outstanding debt and financing options, noting the district could generate capital funds from assessment growth or by issuing second‑lien bonds backed by existing mills.
A Stevens Inc. consultant and district finance staff briefed the board on Sept. 11 on the district’s fiscal position, mills, assessed valuation and debt, and described options for funding capital needs.
Consultant Jack Trump gave a five‑year assessment summary showing the district’s assessed value near $4.0 billion (the presentation used $4,000,000,008.65 as the 2024 certified assessed value and noted a preliminary 2025 figure slightly higher). The district currently levies 32 maintenance & operation (M&O) mills (state constitution requires at least 25), two dedicated M&O mills, and 12.4 debt service mills — a total of 46.4 mills. Trump calculated that, at the cited assessed value and a 95% collection assumption, one mill in LRSD yields about $4,622,220.
Stevens’ slide deck showed the district’s outstanding bonded and non‑bonded debt totaling roughly $490 million and noted a level debt‑service pattern that results in annual payments that aggregate near $26.15 million in many years; Trump presented a debt‑service coverage ratio of about 2.19 based on debt service revenue of roughly $57.3 million. He also summarized recent refundings and estimated total interest‑cost savings realized by the district over several refunding operations at about $29.3 million.
Trump and district staff explained two paths that can generate capital funds without a public millage increase: (1) reappraisals, which increase assessed value and therefore tax revenue, and (2) issuing second‑lien debt (using existing voter‑approved mills as security) after state approval. The consultant noted county reappraisals occur on a four‑year cycle in Pulaski County and that reappraisal years can produce notable assessment growth.
The presentation included a 2025 preliminary state aid and revenue projection showing a modest projected increase in district revenue (Stevens’ slide estimated around $9.3 million additional revenue for FY26 compared with FY25 under conservative assumptions). Staff and consultant stressed the district’s option to free up surplus debt‑service coverage — currently used for operations and pay‑as‑you‑go projects — to back second‑lien borrowing if the board chooses, subject to state approval and public notification rules.
Trustees asked questions about the timing of any mills or campaign, the condition and likely costs at specific campuses (Hall and Pulaski Heights were mentioned), and how assessment growth interacts with state foundation funding. The consultant summarized that if assessment growth continues and the district tightens operations, the district can produce additional capacity for capital investment without immediate voter mill increases. No formal vote or millage decision was taken at the meeting.
