Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Belton board briefed on long-range facilities plan; district flags $52–$54 million bonding capacity and $180 million high-school rebuild estimate
Summary
District staff told the board they've narrowed more than 100 facility ideas to roughly 50 and said they believe the district could bond about $52–$54 million at a no‑tax‑increase levy; they also cited an estimated $180 million cost to fully rebuild the current high school and a very large early‑childhood waiting list.
Superintendent’s staff told the Belton School District No. 124 Board of Education on Oct. 15 that long-range facility planning has narrowed more than 100 initial improvement ideas to roughly 50, and that the district is prioritizing projects based on need and affordability.
The planning group reported that, given current assumptions, the district "feel[s] like we can bond at a no tax increase levy at about $52 to $54,000,000," the superintendent said. The presentation included illustrative cost estimates: a complete rebuild of the current high school was described as roughly $180,000,000, and an elementary school rebuild was described as starting around $45,000,000. Board members were told these figures reflect current market escalation and are intended to frame priority-setting rather than a specific bond package.
Planners said the district met with demographers and held multiple community and staff meetings to gather input. The team described options for building use (for example, using renovated facilities as labs and experiential-learning centers) and stressed the need to weigh roof repairs, renovations and early‑childhood expansion against any potential new construction.
The superintendent raised the scale of unmet early‑childhood demand: a parent called to check her position on the early‑childhood waiting list and was reported as being "number 450" on that list, which the presenters cited as evidence of high demand for additional early‑childhood seats. The board will continue facility discussions in November with architects from IDS working on narrower options and expects to present prioritized scenarios to the board no later than December.
No formal bond proposal or ballot language was presented at the meeting; the discussion was framed as planning and prioritization. The board did not vote on any financing measure at this session.
