Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Referendum topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board advances $43.8M facilities referendum, sets special election April 14, 2026

Little Falls Community Schools Board of Education · December 9, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District staff and financial advisors presented a two-question referendum: Question 1 for $34,305,000 in HVAC and instructional-space improvements and Question 2 for $9,520,000 to add gymnasium space (three courts). The board approved submitting the review-and-comment to the state and voted to call a special election for April 14, 2026 to let voters decide.

The Little Falls Community Schools board advanced a two-question facilities referendum and voted to call a special election on April 14, 2026, after a staff presentation and a financial overview from the district’s advisors.

Financial advisor Michael (PTMA) described the project in two parts: Question 1 would authorize up to $34,305,000 in general obligation bonds for improvements that include indoor air-quality upgrades (HVAC), added instructional space and safety/security work at Little Falls Community High School; Question 2 would authorize up to $9,520,000 for additional gymnasium space — modeled as three courts on the south end of the high school — and associated site work. Michael said the combined estimated cost for both ballot questions is about $43,825,000. He outlined bond assumptions: a 20-year bond structure with estimated payoff on 02/01/2047, a pricing cushion of 0.75 percentage point on current interest-rate assumptions and a projected first tax impact in calendar year 2027 if voters approve the questions.

Board members discussed ballot language for Question 2 to ensure voters understand the proposal contemplates multiple gym courts and whether Question 2 should be contingent on Question 1. Michael explained the board may make Question 2 contingent on Question 1 or let each stand alone; the board retained the contingency language as written and approved the resolution to call the election by roll-call vote. The board also approved the required "review and comment" submission to the state describing project scope, estimated cost, and projected operational savings; staff cited estimated annual operational savings exceeding $1,000,000 from consolidating middle- and high-school space if the plan moves forward.

Michael presented an example tax impact for a $225,000 home: about $175 per year (≈$15/month) if only Question 1 passes; about $63 per year (≈$5/month) for Question 2 alone; combined impact was presented as roughly $20 per month for that example, with the advisor noting actual rates depend on bond pricing, final valuations and whether both questions pass. The board voted to approve the review-and-comment and to place the two questions before voters in April 2026.