Minnetonka outlines $142 million facilities plan, phases possible bond referendums

The Minnetonka Public School District presented the Facilities Task Force recommendations and conceptual cost estimates during its Jan. 20 board study session, including a phased financing plan that would reduce an initial $193 million portfolio to a proposed $142 million package the district would seek in multiple bond issues.

Executive Director of Finance and Operations Bourgeois detailed site‑level concepts for elementary, middle and high‑school campuses and the tax‑impact modeling staff used to shape a staged approach. The presentation included both building footprints and preliminary cost estimates for specific projects.

Why it matters: The proposal would be the district’s first major building referendum since 1996 and would fund additions and renovations intended to address classroom space, performing‑arts venues, gymnasiums, small‑group instructional rooms, restrooms, and security upgrades across the district.

Key elements of the proposal and costs

- Full‑district picture and reductions: First Cut Solutions estimated a full package of task‑force recommendations at about $193 million; staff presented a scaled $142 million package intended to be more affordable and to increase the probability of voter support.

- Elementary projects (examples): Clear Springs — restrooms, special‑education motor classroom and small‑group rooms (estimate reported by staff: roughly $3.3 million for restroom, motor classroom and small‑group work at that site); Deephaven — a gymnasium addition with connections and stormwater work (estimate ~ $11.9 million for the gym plus associated site work; total ~ $13.16 million on the slide); Excelsior, Groveland, Minnewashita and Scenic Heights were shown with site‑specific additions and renovations ranging from roughly $3 million to $5.7 million depending on scope.

- Middle schools: Staff described purpose‑built science rooms, additional PE stations and a performance venue concept that combines a full‑court gym with a 750‑seat performance venue; East Middle School’s combination of performance venue, gym and associated site remediation was shown as a roughly $31.4 million investment for the building’s package.

- High school: Minnetonka High School concepts include a stacked “triple gym” (gymnastics on top, wrestling and weight/cardiovascular below) to save limited campus footprint, a cafeteria serving expansion, student‑services reconfiguration and additional ‘‘loft’’ collaborative spaces; total high‑school new construction and heavy renovation were presented as approximately 40,000 square feet of new construction and 14,600 square feet of heavy renovation.

- Safety and technology: The presentation included an Epic classroom security/audio system estimated at $7 million for districtwide classroom audio and integrated safety communications. A district staff member said the system would "give every teacher the chance to have their, voice amplified to every student in the room" and also allow teachers to "immediately communicate" safety concerns without alerting students, calling it "state of the art building security for school systems." (discussion credited to district staff working with a vendor.)

Tax and financing plan

Staff presented a phased approach to financing to limit an immediate tax spike. Bourgeois and others described a multi‑stage issuance stretching projects and payments across several years, including the use of a bond‑anticipation note for early construction financing and multiple general‑obligation bond tranches that would be layered to 2055. Under the scenario shown, staff estimated the increase on a median $500,000 home would be about $9 per month (about $109 per year). Bourgeois cited results from a June 2024 Morris Leatherman survey that, when asked about tax tolerance, suggested roughly 65% of respondents indicated willingness to pay $9 a month or more.

Board questions and concerns

Board members pressed staff for operational cost projections, effects on district debt capacity and staging impacts on schools during construction. Several board members said the district must balance needs with the community’s capacity to pay. One board member cautioned: "We're doubling almost doubling our outstanding debt with this proposal," and urged careful consideration of taxpayer tolerance. Staff noted the district holds a AAA bond rating but said the additional borrowing could affect the district’s relative debt metrics in Moody’s analysis and might lower the rating by one or two notches in a worst case — a change staff said would likely increase borrowing costs by a small number of basis points.

Next steps

Staff said they will publish the presentation and post it to the Facilities Task Force page, send a follow‑up survey to a random sample of about 1,000 community members and return to the board in February with operational cost estimates and a summary of community feedback. Staff described deadlines tied to the Department of Education review process and the election‑calendar timeline; they noted that if the state issues a favorable review, a referendum would require a simple majority (50%+1) while an unfavorable review would raise the voter threshold to 60%.

No formal vote was taken during the study session. The board directed staff to collect more detailed operational cost information, community input and follow‑up analysis before deciding whether to place any bond questions before voters.

Speakers quoted in this article spoke during the Facilities Task Force portion of the Jan. 20 board study session and are included in the transcript evidence below.