A recent poll of likely Summit County voters revealed mixed levels of support for two funding proposals from the Summit School District that may appear on voters’ ballots this November. 

District officials are continuing to finalize the details of a multimillion-dollar bond and mill levy increase that would raise property taxes to help pay for a slew of capital investments and bolster staffing. 

During a May 30 board of education meeting, district leaders reviewed the results of a survey meant to gauge residents’ appetite for various spending proposals as officials continue to debate what to include in the final package. 

The survey, which was conducted between April 29 and May 1, polled 300 residents who said they were likely to vote in the November 5 general election, with respondents ranging in age, location and political affiliation. 

Results show that likely voters remain concerned about heightened taxes, particularly after seeing an increase in property tax bills this year, said public policy consultant Bill Ray, who has conducted polls for other school districts and local governments around the state. 

“There is a real concern about taxes and the impacts of recent tax increase on folks,” Ray said, with 24% of respondents saying taxes are their highest priority issue heading into this election followed by affordable housing and cost of living. 

While nearly half of respondents said they believe the district should have more funding, “at the same time, we only had about 40% being confident in how the school district handles taxpayer dollars,” Ray said. 

When it came to the two funding proposals, a slight majority of voters, just over 50%, supported a mill override while less than half, 45%, supported a bond. 

Officials say the mill levy override would increase property taxes by approximately $5.40 per month, about $65 per year, for a home valued at $1 million within the district’s tax boundary. A mill is a tax on property, with one mill representing a $1 payment on every $1,000 of assessed property value. 

The funds could be used for staff recruitment and retention, such as through pay increases, officials say. A bond, on the other hand, can only be used to generate revenue for infrastructure projects and allows the district to take on new debt that is later paid off using property tax dollars. 

District officials initially considered a bond proposal for up to $267 million but have since reduced the amount. The survey asked respondents to consider a $195 million bond that officials say would translate to a $13 per month, or $158 per year, property tax increase on a $1 million home. 

Be more informed in 2025.

Sign up for daily or weekly newsletters at SummitDaily.com/newsletter

A Spanish-speaking survey was also completed, with 33 respondents. Results show that support for the mill levy override and bond were greater at  91% and 85%, respectively. Those figures did drop to just over 82% and 76% after respondents were asked again at the end of the survey about both proposals.

Ray said the district should consider that voters’ support for a mill levy — because of its lower dollar figure — could hurt support for a bond if both make it onto the ballot. But he added that there is still time for the district to campaign and grow support for both proposals ahead of November. 

Ray said by finalizing the bond package, “the components, and really getting out there and educating the community on the process (and) the need” the district can “increase the confidence and ultimately the support in the bond.”

Currently, officials are weighing a number of high-priority infrastructure projects that could make up the bond proposal. Those include building dozens of district-owned affordable housing units for staff, expanding career-readiness program materials and class space for students and either rebuilding, consolidating or renovating Breckenridge Elementary. 

While support for staff housing, career-readiness programs and general maintenance was mostly strong among respondents, the question of what to do with Breckenridge Elementary received mixed results. 

Just over one-third of respondents, 35%, said they were in support of the district completing critical maintenance investments to extend the life of the school while 26% supported building an entirely new school. Around 16% said the district should consider closing Breckenridge Elementary and combining it with Upper Blue. 

The elementary school, which opened in 1972, is the oldest school building in the district and has the highest facilities condition index rating at 75.5%. The rating represents the ratio of a building’s repair needs to replacement value, with higher ratings indicating a building is in worse condition. 

While officials stressed that the school remains safe to operate, it faces three critical needs, according to chief financial officer Kara Drake. 

One is that the building’s roof is no longer compliant with code for snow load and would need new reinforcement of its beams. Another issue is the presence of asbestos that, while contained, could become a concern if any construction or remodel work happened. Finally, the building lacks enough sprinklers, Drake said.

But the future of the school has become an emotional topic without an easy answer, said Superintendent Tony Byrd. 

“There’s no energy, as far as I can find … around combining the school,” Byrd said. “And I think school consolidation is complicated.”

That leaves constructing a new school or extending the building’s life as the two viable options, with Byrd adding that, eventually, the board will need to make a decision if one of those is to be folded into the bond proposal. 

Board member Vanessa Agee said she’s been conflicted about what the right solution is for the school, adding, “I don’t know that we’re going to have a better solution in 10 years if we just keep patching it up and doing maintenance. I really struggle with that.”

Board members said they planned to have an in-depth discussion about Breckenridge Elementary at their upcoming board retreat in late June. 

Ray said that as the board continues to consider its options for both a mill levy override and bond, public support could change as its messages become clearer. 

“There’s a balance between trying to figure out what is politically feasible but also what needs to happen to make the district move forward and succeed for another decade,” Ray said. 

Officials are aiming to finalize the ballot language by September before officially campaigning for the proposals up until the Nov. 5 election. The full survey results can be viewed online at Tinyurl.com/SSDvotersurvey2024.