Ridgefield board previews replacement EPO levy and recommends shorter capital levy to prioritize new elementary school and repairs

Ridgefield School District directors on Wednesday heard first readings of two major funding proposals: a replacement educational programs and operations (EPO) levy and a proposed capital and technology levy to support construction of a third elementary school, deferred maintenance and technology needs.

Dr. Rodriguez, the district superintendent, told the board the EPO levy being proposed in Resolution 2024‑25 D002 is a replacement levy at a rate of $1.75 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, estimated to generate about $14 million in 2026, $14.5 million in 2027 and just over $15 million in 2028. "We are looking potentially at running a replacement EPO levy for calendar years 2026, 2027 and 2028," Dr. Rodriguez said during the meeting, and emphasized that the draft resolution labels the measure a replacement, not a new tax slice.

The board also reviewed two capital/technology options. Option A is a six‑year package that the district estimates could raise roughly $54 million and would address upgrades at multiple elementary campuses, technology and other needs. Option B, which Dr. Rodriguez recommended, is a shorter three‑year capital and technology levy focused primarily on building Elementary 3, addressing deferred maintenance at Union and South Ridge schools and reinstating a technology replacement budget. The superintendent described Option B as a more modest near‑term ask, saying it could be structured "as low as $0.84 per $1,000" in assessed valuation for the three‑year request.

Officials laid out how state school construction assistance (SCAP) and local impact fees would be used alongside levy proceeds. Dr. Rodriguez and staff cautioned that SCAP calculations depend on enrollment, building age and other variables; they noted the district could leverage an estimated $16.5 million in state support for a new K‑8 project in combination with levy proceeds and impact fees. The district estimate for the full all‑in cost of Elementary 3 was presented near $52 million; staff said available cash, state match and impact fees would leave a shortfall that might require short‑term borrowing to front‑fund construction so an opening in fall 2026 would be feasible.

Paula McCoy, the district's Executive Director of Business Services, summarized the fiscal context that underlies the proposals. She said the general fund closed the prior fiscal year roughly $667,000 above budgeted revenues and about $3 million under budgeted expenses after staffing controls and other reductions, and that those results inform the district's planning for levy measures and capital timing.

Board members asked for specifics on staffing for any new building; the district said most staff for a new elementary would be relocated existing employees and only a limited number of new positions (for example a head secretary) would be added. Board members also pressed on timing: staff said to meet the county's filing deadline for a February election the board would need to adopt the levy resolution at its Dec. 10 meeting to allow the county to receive materials by Dec. 13.

No formal vote was taken Wednesday; the measures were presented as first reads and will return for action at the board's next regular meeting. If the board votes to place the asks on the February ballot, the district expects to publish notice in advance and appoint pro/con committees for the county voters' pamphlet as required by election rules.

What happens next: the board scheduled further discussion and a potential action vote on Dec. 10; if the board moves ahead, materials must be with the county by Dec. 13 to qualify for the February election.