Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Telluride School District outlines revenue shortfall, proposes mill‑levy override option
Summary
District leaders told San Miguel County commissioners that state funding formula changes and declining enrollment could leave the district millions short; an increase of roughly 1.63 mills would raise about $2.6 million and reduce projected cuts, but significant long‑term gaps remain even with the override.
Telluride School District officials presented a detailed budget outlook and asked commissioners to be aware of a possible local mill‑levy override (MLO) to shore up program funding.
Cheryl Miller and finance director John Pandolfo said the district is moving off a temporary hold‑harmless funding status and faces a multi‑year decline in state program funding tied to recent formula changes. Pandolfo told the board that an MLO increase of about 1.63 mills would generate roughly $2.6 million in new revenues and that, without action, the district may face a structural deficit that could force deeper staffing and program reductions.
Pandolfo described enrollment and funding projections that underlie the proposal: the district peaked near 910 students in recent years, was at about 752 this year and could fall further (district projections cited enrollments in the 600s by the full phase‑in of the formula). He also explained how changes to averaging, the capped cost‑of‑living factor and a newly calculated locale/remoteness factor have accelerated expected revenue losses. The presentation included sensitivity analyses showing that, absent new revenue or state fixes, the district could need to reduce staff by dozens of positions to close gaps in later years.
Miller and Pandolfo also reviewed potential statewide ballot measures that could affect district revenues, including a TABOR‑related measure (SB 26135) and a proposed graduated income tax initiative (Initiative 195) that would provide broader revenue for education and other services; the district would not be able to rely on those outcomes alone and is planning the local outreach and voter‑education work if it moves forward with an MLO request.
Commissioners asked for plain‑language materials for the public and emphasized that any local ask should explain what a mill‑levy override is, why it is needed now (the districtis exiting hold‑harmless), and what programs and staff the money would support. The board did not take a vote and asked the district to return with outreach materials and precise ballot language if it decides to proceed.
What happens next: district staff will prepare public materials and timing options; commissioners signaled interest in early voter education but said they will wait for formal ballot language and specific proposals to consider endorsement or other support.
