After months of deliberation, public polling and fine-tuning, Summit School District officials have unveiled a final version of a bond proposal that is likely to appear on voters’ ballots in November. 

Since late last year, district officials have been discussing the idea of a bond measure to fund critical infrastructure needs alongside other high-profile projects, from developing staff housing to rebuilding Breckenridge Elementary. 

“We really believe that this is a visionary investment for our students,” said Superintendent Tony Byrd. “This is a chance for us really to make a paradigm shift of what learning is all about. I honestly feel like Summit School District is primed for this opportunity.”

---

---

Since the bond’s initial proposal, its estimated topline number has been whittled down from $267 million to $195.4 million after public polling showed mixed support for some of the proposals. Officials had also considered asking voters for a mill levy override, which they said would have supported staff recruitment and retention, but ultimately decided against putting the question on the November ballot. 

Bonds allow the district to take on new debt to finance large-scale projects, with the debt paid off using property tax revenue. To ensure the district has the funds to pay its debt, the bond also allows officials to reassess the district’s mill levy each year. A mill is a tax on property, with one mill representing a $1 payment on every $1,000 of assessed property value.

---

---

A $195.4 million bond, as currently proposed, would increase property taxes by about $156 per year — $13 per month — for a home valued at $1 million, according to the district. 

---

Stay connected to Summit County.

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

---

The last time Summit County residents passed a bond for the school district was in 2016, when 60% of voters approved a $68.9 million measure to pay for school building upgrades and replacements, funds that were set to be spent within three to five years of the bond’s passage. 

Here’s what’s in the 2024 package:

Staff housing 

The bond proposal would raise $46 million to develop 60 units of below-market-rate housing that would be reserved for district staff. The units would be located on a roughly 10-acre parcel of district-owned land in Silverthorne, the former site of Silverthorne Elementary. 

High housing costs are seen as serious obstacles to recruiting and maintaining staff, district leaders say.

A survey of nearly 400 district employees last fall showed that nearly half — 48% — are considering leaving due to the high cost of housing while 42% said they spend nearly one-third of their income on rent or their mortgage. It also showed turnover rate for support staff was nearly 40%, with housing costs being a major contributing factor. 

“If we have a constant turnover, it costs a lot of money, costs a lot of time and makes it really hard for the learning of students,” Byrd said. 

While the site could support up to 91 units, officials say they want to start with 60 to meet urgent needs before potentially phasing-in the rest of the development over the coming years.

The units will all be for-rent with the goal for housing costs not to exceed 30% of a staff member’s salary. According to Chief Financial Officer Kara Drake, the first 60 units could open as early as fall 2026. 

Breckenridge Elementary 

Nearly $47 million in bond funding would be used to demolish and rebuild Breckenridge Elementary, the oldest school building in the district. 

The building faces a number of structural deficiencies, including a roof that is no longer up to code and that contains asbestos. Its current facility condition index rating, which represents the ratio of a building’s repair needs to its replacement value, with higher ratings indicating a building is in worse condition, is 75.5% — the highest of any district school building.

The proposed bond would support the construction of a new, 40,000-square-foot building on the same site. According to Drake, the plan is to keep students in the existing school until the new building is completed, at which point students would be moved in a way that minimizes classroom disruption. 

Still, plans may need to be adjusted, and Drake said other temporary solutions could include combining existing students with another school or setting up class spaces to be used in the short-term while construction is ongoing. 

District officials had been considering three outcomes for the elementary school, including rebuilding, with the other two options being to either remodel the existing building or combine its students with Upper Blue Elementary. 

A spring survey of 300 likely Summit County voters found 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. 

Ultimately, Byrd said reconstruction will be the most cost-effective solution in the long run, adding, “At some point, the conversations will come up for every school for what we do.”

Snowy Peaks  

The bond proposal includes $37 million to rebuild and relocate Snowy Peaks Junior and Senior High School, which is currently attached to Summit Middle School on the district’s main campus in Frisco. 

The plan calls for a 31,000-square-foot building on the site of Summit High School. Officials say the existing building had become inadequate for students and staff, citing the lack of a gym and administrative space. 

By moving the school closer to Summit High, officials also want to provide Snowy Peaks students with better access to career and technical education programs — another key focus of the bond proposal. 

“Snowy Peaks students deserve that as much as any other student in the system,” Byrd said. 

The plan for construction will be the same as Breckenridge Elementary, with students occupying the existing space until the new school building is ready. 

While district officials decided to forgo creating a resource center for district families as part of the bond proposal due to a lack of support from polling, the idea could be reintroduced once the existing Snowy Peaks building is no longer occupied. 

Byrd said he plans to launch a task force to convene with county nonprofits and decide what, if any, services could be provided by a resource center, such as greater mental health support. 

Career and technical education 

The bond calls for $32 million to build a new hub for the district’s career and technical education programs, dubbed the Career and Technical Education Innovation Center. 

In what Byrd described as a “mini-college campus” the center would be located in the same area as Summit High and the new Snowy Peaks building as well as Colorado Mountain College’s Breckenridge campus, which partners with the district to offer college-level classes for high schoolers. 

The district in recent years has pushed to make career-readiness a central focus for its graduates, launching programs that pair students with experts across industries — from learning how to manufacture skis to building a livable tiny home. 

District officials envision a new, 23,000-square-foot facility that will add 10 additional classrooms and labs to support and expand hands-on learning programs. Byrd gave the example of a simulation room where students pursuing a health care course could practice on mannequins. 

Additionally, officials plan to remodel existing spaces at Summit High that currently house career and technical education classes. 

Other critical maintenance 

The last major chunk of bond funding, $33.6 million, will be earmarked for critical maintenance and capital improvements to buildings district wide across 133 infrastructure projects.

Those include replacing outdated electrical, plumbing and heating ventilation, safety and security upgrades, expanded counseling spaces, improved internet connection, upgraded playgrounds at all elementary schools as well as asphalt, concrete and sidewalk replacement. 

What comes next?

The district is planning to hold two community meetings to discuss the proposals with the public. Those will be held on Aug. 6 and 13 at Summit Middle School from 5:30-7:30 p.m. 

The district’s board of education must approve the bond’s ballot language by September for it to appear on the Nov. 5 ballot. 

District polling of county residents shows voters remain concerned about heightened taxes, particularly after seeing an increase in property tax bills this year. While the bond measure would amount to a further property tax increase — $13 a month for a $1 million home — Byrd said he believes it is worth the investment. 

“People, understandably, are worried about their taxes,” Byrd said. “We’re trying to get this to a place with the most minimal (financial) impact.” 

While the district did see a gain in property revenue this year, much of that was offset by a steep reduction in state funding. The reason has to do with the state’s public school funding formula — in years when local revenues are higher, the state’s share goes down. 

And even with strong local revenue, Drake said the district’s general fund budget could never support the kind of big-ticket items being proposed as part of the bond. That’s because roughly 90% of the district’s general fund consistently goes to staff salaries. 

Drake said the district does benefit from a AAA bond rating, “which is essentially equivalent to your personal credit score, and so it allows us to secure better rates when we do issue debt.”

Byrd said he is hopeful voters will approve the bond measure, pointing to a history of “Summit County coming together to support education through bonds before.”