Durango School District unveils staff housing plan with tiered lottery, aims for 2026 move‑ins

Durango School District No. 9‑R staff and the district’s Financial Advisory Committee presented a staff housing proposal that would allocate available units across five employee tiers, use a lottery to assign units, and set sample rents from about $750 for the most‑subsidized tier to roughly $1,950 for a two‑bedroom unit in the highest tier.

A staff presenter told the board that “assuming we get approvals tonight, [our] goal will be to have educators moving into units as early as 2026,” and that the district could open applications as early as January with applicant notifications by mid‑March. The presenter said revenue above a roughly 53% occupancy threshold would be placed in a building reserve to fund long‑term needs and future housing strategies.

The Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) framed the proposal with budget concerns: a FAC representative said the committee supports competitive wages but is “concerned about the district spending 8 to 7% of its budget on salaries and benefits,” arguing that a high salary share constrains the district’s ability to absorb other planned or unplanned expenses.

Under the proposed rules, the district would not assign specific unit types to tiers; rather, lottery winners in each tier would be offered units in order until a tier’s allocation is exhausted, and any remaining units would roll forward to the next year. Sample pricing cited in the presentation included $750 per month for category 1 and approximately $1,950 for a two‑bedroom in category 5, with intermediate tiers priced between those figures.

On payment mechanics, a legal/HR speaker advised the board that the district cannot require payroll deduction for rent. “We can’t require or make somebody have a payroll deduction,” the speaker said, and noted staff can offer alternatives such as automated bank drafts; payroll deduction would be permitted only if an employee signs a written agreement. The presenter and other board members also confirmed lease terms will prohibit selling or transferring a lease to people not on the lease.

Staff said they formed a 16‑member housing advisory committee to craft equitable selection criteria and that the program design includes preservation of roughly 10% of units for immediate recruitment needs (for hard‑to‑fill positions). The committee recommended allowing payroll auto‑deduction as an opt‑in feature, preserving units for recruitment, and revisiting allocation rules annually.

Next steps, the presenter said, are to incorporate board feedback, finalize the rules and pricing, and bring the program back for any needed approvals; staff indicated they intend to issue public messaging before the district break and to prepare application materials for a January opening if the board approves.

The board’s Q&A section raised operational questions (verification of applicants, treatment of spouses’ incomes, and transferability of leases) that staff said they would address in the final program rules. The proposal also noted the district is monitoring state rebate programs for energy efficiency that could lower rehabilitation costs for the housing units.

The meeting did not record a final vote on the housing proposal during the portion of transcript provided; staff identified the approval threshold and next steps but did not announce a formal adoption in the provided segments.