Park Hill board places two tax measures on April 8 ballot to boost pay and fix aging schools

The Park Hill Board of Education on Jan. 23 voted to place two tax measures on the April 8 ballot that together would raise property taxes if voters approve them: Proposition G, a proposed 10¢ increase per $100 of assessed valuation to fund staff recruitment and retention, and Proposition O, a bond authorization to fund roughly $128 million in capital work on aging buildings.

Superintendent Doctor Kimball and finance lead Doctor Kelly presented the measures and explained how they fit into the district’s Park Hill 2034 facilities plan. Doctor Kelly said Proposition G targets competitive salaries, including improving beginning pay and overall compensation metrics; the presentation described an operating-levy increase of 10¢ per $100 of assessed valuation to pay for that objective. On Proposition O, consultants from Hollis & Miller presented conceptual master plans for Park Hill High School and other campuses and said the bond program would be repaid through a debt-service levy increase estimated in the presentation at about 30¢ per $100 of assessed valuation. District staff said, if both measures pass as presented, the combined tax impact would be about a 40¢ increase in levy rate.

“Because staff compensation is a recurring annual expenditure, it will require an operating levy increase to bring in the revenue that we’ll need,” Doctor Kelly said in the presentation, noting the board had worked with bond counsel to finalize ballot language. Consultants emphasized conceptual renderings and said all designs remain preliminary and subject to later design processes and community input.

Board members cited long-running planning and community engagement: the superintendent and staff described multiple community sessions and thousands of survey responses informing Park Hill 2034. During discussion, one board member framed the operating-levy proposal as a step toward top-tier starting salaries and competitive overall pay in the region.

The board adopted separate resolutions calling an election on April 8, 2025 for Proposition G and Proposition O; both motions carried with the board president recording unanimous votes. The agenda item materials note bond counsel prepared the language that will appear on the ballot and the district intends to meet county election filing timelines.

Votes at a glance

- Adopt agenda as presented: motion by Mister Todd, second by Miss Barnes — carried (6 yes). - Approve consent agenda (items 5.2–5.16): moved by Miss Woodley, seconded by Doctor Kimball — carried (6 yes). - Approve 2025–26 academic calendar: motion by Missus Barber, second by Miss Barnes — carried (6 yes). - Adopt resolution calling election for Proposition G (operating levy, 10¢ per $100): motion moved and seconded on the record — carried (6 yes). - Adopt resolution calling election for Proposition O (general obligation bonds, ~ $128,000,000; estimated 30¢ debt-service levy): motion moved and seconded on the record — carried (6 yes). - Accept receipt of December 2024 information report: motion moved and seconded — carried (6 yes). - Adopt Policy 8.4 and amend Policy 8.5 as presented: motion moved and seconded — carried (6 yes). - Motion to adjourn to closed session to discuss legal, student and personnel matters: moved and seconded — carried (roll call recorded yes votes).

Why it matters

The two ballot measures mark the next step in a multi-year facilities and staffing plan the district calls Park Hill 2034. Proposition G is explicitly framed as recurring revenue to support competitive salaries; Proposition O would fund capital projects the district says are its highest priorities among older buildings. If voters approve both measures, the district would implement both recurring operating increases and long-term debt to finance buildings, changing the district’s tax levy and debt-service profile.

What’s next

The resolutions place the two items on the April 8, 2025 ballot; district staff indicated they will proceed with the election timelines and follow-up community engagement and design processes if the measures pass. The board also approved routine consent and policy actions at the meeting and accepted the December financial report.