Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Referendum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews draft $154M operational referendum and asks for alternate models
Summary
District staff presented a stepped, four‑year operational referendum designed to be tax‑mill‑rate neutral and close a funding gap caused by years of state funding not keeping pace with inflation. Board members asked staff to model alternative inflation assumptions (e.g., 3.25%–4.0%) and to clarify costs and messaging.
District staff presented a draft operational referendum the board would place on the November ballot seeking authority to exceed the revenue limit in stepped amounts over four years. Staff said the four‑year total in the projection model is $154,000,000, with an initial year request framed as "up to" roughly $27 million; they emphasized the question is written to be mill‑rate neutral under current projections.
"This will be a stepped ask over four years," said Angie (district staff). "With this question, we will be asking for a $154,000,000 over a 4 year period of time... It will be tax, mill rate tax neutral." Staff explained the projection assumes a 3% inflationary factor for salaries and benefits, includes contract escalators for transportation and software, and assumes continued rightsizing via attrition.
Board members probed several points: how precisely the yearly amounts are calibrated to keep the mill rate flat; whether 3% is a conservative assumption for future inflation; and what would happen if the referendum failed. Several members asked staff to return in two weeks with alternative scenarios (for example 3.25%, 3.5% and 4% inflation assumptions) so the board can weigh the ballot‑question amounts against political messaging considerations. Staff replied those alternate scenarios could be produced quickly and reiterated that the ballot language must conform to state statute for how the question is phrased.
Staff warned that failure of the referendum would accelerate previously discussed right‑sizing measures, potentially including faster consolidation and program reductions. They also noted the district’s operating budget (fund 10 and 27 combined) is roughly $375–400 million, providing context for the proposed four‑year ask.
The board did not vote on the referendum question at the July 13 meeting; staff said the board will vote on the finalized ballot language in two weeks and that outreach materials would follow.
