Photo: Pagosa Peak Open School school director Emily Murphy makes a presentation to the Archuleta School District Board of Education on Wednesday, June 3.
As mentioned yesterday in Part One, I currently serve on the Pagosa Peak Open School (PPOS) board of directors, and it’s possible PPOS could benefit from a potential ballot measure placed before Archuleta County voters in November. During facility planning processes conducted by the Archuleta School District (ASD) over the past 18 months, we often heard promises that certain PPOS facility needs would be addressed, if ASD decides to place a bond issue before the voters in 2026 or 2027.
It appears that PPOS — a public, District-authorized, tuition-free K-8 charter school — will be serving about 10% of ASD’s 1,500 students next year.
Disclosure: This editorial expresses only my own personal opinions, however, and not necessarily the opinions of the PPOS Board or staff.
At the regular meeting of the School Board on June 3, PPOS School Director Emily Murphy explained her school’s need for upgrades — in particular, a conversion of a currently-unusable warehouse space attached to the former office building in which PPOS operates. That warehouse could provide future space for physical education, maker spaces, and science labs, if remodeled to meet state building codes.
Ms. Murphy estimated the conversion costs at $1 million – $2 million. That amount could potentially be included in a future ballot measure.
There is no such ballot measure definitely proposed at the moment. But various forms of a tax-funded bond measure have been under consideration by Archuleta School District (ASD) for at least the past 15 years, and especially, over the past two years, beginning with several public presentations by Superintendent Rick Holt about school facilities…
… followed by the appointment of a Master Plan Advisory Committee in January 2025…
…followed by a survey of likely voters in June 2025…
…followed by a decision by the ASD Board of Education to propose a brand new $126 million PreK-8 school facility on District-owned property at the west end of town…
…followed by the submission of a $50 million BEST grant request in February 2026…
…followed, last month, by notice that ASD had not been awarded a BEST grant.
Where do we go from here?
I’m interested in this topic, obviously — and not just because it might benefit PPOS through a future ballot measure. I’m also fascinated by local politics and by the ways local government leaders interface with the taxpayers.
Just prior to hearing Ms. Murphy’s presentation at their regular meeting on June 3, the School Board had conducted a work session, during which ‘next steps’ were discussed with three out-of-town consultants — Doug Abernethy with RTA Architects, Lynea Hansen with Hansen Communications, and Kathryn Hahne with New Bridge Strategy — and the only definite decision to come from the work session concerned a survey of likely voters to take place in June and July, with a final report due in mid-July.
It appears that the School Board, as a body, will not approve the survey questions. Instead, he questions in the survey will be determined by Superintendent Rick Holt in collaboration with Lynea Hansen and Kathryn Hahne.
I’ve written about government-funded surveys on occasion, here in the Daily Post, and noted that these surveys can be quite accurate in predicting local election results, if the survey questions are properly framed. For example, in 2022, the Archuleta County government hired consulting firm Magellan Strategies to see how the voters felt about a 1% sales tax increase. One of the questions asked likely voters if they trusted the County government to spend money wisely.
Only 27% of the respondents — about one in four — had a good opinion of the County government.
The Archuleta Board of County Commissioners reviewed the survey results and, curiously enough, determined that they had a good chance of getting the voters to approve a sales tax increase.
When the votes were counted, only 27% of the voters supported the tax increase.
We could hardly wish for a more accurate assessment of voter sentiment than the one generated by Magellan Strategies. We could, on the other hand, definitely wish for government leadership that has a realistic view of their own community.
One of the key questions that might be included in the upcoming voter survey, the consultants told the School Board, would ask likely voters to respond to sample ballot language.
Under Colorado law, ballot measures that ask for a tax increase must meet rather strict guidelines. For one thing, they must be written in ALL CAPS. For another thing, they must include the full cost of any debts created, including both principal and interest. In the case of the $126 million school facility that might be subsidized by a future BEST grant, the portion of the debt funded by the local property tax increase — including the interest payments — could be somewhere between $135 million and $159 million, depending on how the bond is structured. (Those are Daily Post estimates based on available information.) Even with a potential $50 million BEST grant in 2027 or 2028, the local property tax increase needed to fund the proposed facility would be more than the actual cost of the facility, due to necessary interest payments.
The actual ballot language might look something like this:
SHALL ARCHULETA COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT #50JT DEBT BE INCREASED $90 MILLION, WITH A TOTAL REPAYMENT COST OF NOT MORE THAN $159 MILLION (PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST), TO FINANCE CAPITAL ASSETS AND IMPROVEMENTS OF THE DISTRICT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
• ADDRESSING STUDENT AND STAFF SAFETY IN THE ELEMENTARY AND MIDDLE SCHOOL BY BUILDING A NEW PREK-8 FACILITY ON DISTRICT PROPERTY ON VISTA BOULEVARD;
• AND ADDRESSING FACILITY NEEDS AT PAGOSA SPRINGS HIGH SCHOOL, SAN JUAN MOUNTAIN SCHOOL, PAGOSA PEAK OPEN SCHOOL, AND OTHER DISTRICT FACILITIES;
WITH SUCH INCREASE CONTINGENT UPON THE DISTRICT’S RECEIPT OF AT LEAST $50 MILLION IN COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BEST (“BUILDING EXCELLENT SCHOOLS TODAY”) GRANT FUNDING IN 2027 OR 2028;
AND SHALL DISTRICT TAXES BE INCREASED NOT MORE THAN $6.4 MILLION ANNUALLY TO PAY SUCH DEBT, AND MAY THE MILL LEVY BE IMPOSED IN ANY YEAR WITHOUT LIMITATION AS TO RATE BUT ONLY IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF, PREMIUM, IF ANY, AND INTEREST ON SUCH DEBT OR ANY REFUNDING DEBT (OR TO CREATE A RESERVE FOR SUCH PAYMENT)…
ASD has not been able to get voter approval for such a tax-funded bond measure since 1996. Nor has any other local government, for that matter. Archuleta County voters have not approved a tax increase for any new government facility in the past 30 years.
But ASD did get voters to twice approve a tax-funded Mill Levy Override (“MLO”), first in 2018 and then renewed in 2023. That MLO increased overall property taxes by $1.7 million annually, for teacher salaries and upgrades to existing buildings.
Just wondering. Would local voters embrace an increase to the MLO… if we decided to repair and upgrade the schools we already have?
Read Part Three… tomorrow…