Scottsdale Unified School District will have to act fast to put a bond request on the November ballot.
According to SUSD Superintendent Scott Menzel, “June 8 is when the ballot language is due to the county.
“We will be bringing forward a recommendation on May 12 for board action,” he added.
At its April 28 meeting, the SUSD Governing Board was bombarded with information lumped into the agenda item “Potential Bond Election.”
“A potential bond would focus on key district priorities, including infrastructure improvements, life-cycle maintenance of existing facilities, instructional technology needs, safety and security upgrades, and replacement of aging buses,” an agenda report on the topic noted.
The board heard about recent bond packages approved by district voters, tax projections for three options and “voter preferences.”
The latter was presented by paid consultant Noble Predictive Insights.
Though not quite a sales pitch, the consultant’s survey of 408 “likely voters” could whet the board’s appetite for a new bond request.
According to Noble’s survey, a third of respondents believe SUSD is moving in the “right direction”; a quarter said the district is headed in the “wrong direction.” Forty-two percent were unsure.
Asked if they would pay $16.73 per month for a school bond, 59% said they would “strongly support” or “somewhat support” the request. And 30% opposed the idea, with 10% unsure.
Perhaps not much of a shocker, support dropped when the projected bond price increased.
A $350 million received 67% support.
“Yes” responses dropped to 54% for a $475 million bond.
The district’s most recent bond election was approved by voters in 2016 in the amount of $229 million.
At the April 28 meeting, the board was given an overview of three bond options: $375 million; $395 million and $475 million.
If the board decides to ask for a bond, it will come roughly a year after a split vote to shutter two SUSD schools.
In the coming months, Menzel will present other possible campuses to close.
“We’re possibly going to ask for a bond while we are talking about closing another school or two or three,” Dennis Roehler, SUSD’s director of Facilities and Bond Management, acknowledged.
Menzel quickly jumped in, noting “our primary investment will be in schools that are thriving.”
The superintendent repeated what has come to be his catch phrase: “We have to shrink our footprint.”
Though declining enrollment – and enrollment-related funding – is putting more schools on the chopping block, Menzel strongly hinted at “an opportunity before we take the potential bond to voters – we can add more.”
Indeed, as voter approval is required in most cases involving selling district property, the board may put a request to sell unused schools on the ballot.
More detail on that idea is also expected at the May 12 board meeting.