Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bonds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District finance adviser outlines $50M and $75M bond scenarios, urges community survey and facilities review
Summary
Mike LaValle, a municipal finance adviser with Stifel, told the Casa Grande Union High School District governing board that the district is in a favorable position to consider voter‑authorized bonds because assessed valuations have grown and the district’s existing debt will be fully retired within about two years.
Get email alerts on the Bonds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mike LaValle, a municipal finance adviser with Stifel, told the Casa Grande Union High School District governing board that the district is in a favorable position to consider voter‑authorized bonds because assessed valuations have grown and the district’s existing debt will be fully retired within about two years.
LaValle outlined two illustrative scenarios. A $50 million bond package, structured across multiple sales and repaid over 20 years, could be sized so the bond portion of the property‑tax rate remains at or below the current approximately $0.31 per $100 of assessed value. LaValle estimated an average annual bond tax impact of about $0.2147 per $100 of assessed value (roughly $21.47 on a $100,000 tax value), and noted that because typical tax (limited) values for homes in the district are lower than market values, the household example on the district’s average tax value ($131,000) would be approximately $28.27 per year (about $2.36 per month).
A larger $75 million scenario would increase the bond portion of the tax rate by several cents; LaValle showed modeling that produced an illustrative bond tax rate near the low‑to‑mid 30‑cent range (about a 4¢ increase over the current bond rate, depending on assessed‑value changes). He emphasized that these were example structures and that final sizing and timing depend on the board’s priorities and February assessed‑value estimates.
LaValle also reviewed the district’s bonding capacity calculation (statutory 10% of net full‑cash assessed value less outstanding principal) and noted that current capacity estimates exceed the illustrative bond sizes, but stressed that capacity is distinct from voter authority — the board must still seek voter approval to issue bonds.
Board and staff discussion focused on timing and public outreach. LaValle recommended calling an election no later than mid‑June to meet county timelines for a November ballot and outlined steps such as community polling/survey work, cost‑estimates from construction staff, and phasing options. Superintendent Lavender said the next steps will include forming a facilities committee to review the needs assessment, conducting community surveys, and returning to the board in April with reports and an option to take action in May about placing a bond on the November ballot.
LaValle: "We can structure those bonds in such a way where we keep it at or below 31¢ going forward."

