Facility Planning Community Feedback

During the district’s facility planning process, the district sought community feedback related to a variety of efficiency scenarios, whether to explore a new or renovated middle school option, and respondent viewpoints on the tax impact of a potential bond referendum.

In March 2025, a community survey about facility planning garnered nearly 3,000 responses.

Respondent Snapshot

Total Respondents
2,970

Relationship to District
Parent/Guardian: 64.78%
Staff Member: 34.65%
Student: 1.99%
Community Member: 25.22%		 Age
Under 18: 1.79%
18-24: 2.02%
25-34: 15.07%
35-44: 38.73%
45-54: 25.38%
55-64: 11.29%
65+: 5.73%		 Time Living in District
<5 Years: 6.76%
5-9 Years: 8.62%
10-14 Years: 12.03%
15-19 Years: 9.26%
20+ Years: 63.33%

Response Overview

When asked to consider four efficiency strategies as appealing or not appealing, respondents answered as follows:

A chart showing the percentage of respondents who chose efficiency options as appealing or not appealing. Results were as follows: Consolidation from three to two middle schools received 54.61% appealing and 45.39% not appealing; Additional consolidation of two-section elementary schools received 30.15% appealing and 69.85% not appealing; Reorganization of existing schools to create one high school and one middle school received 10.99% appealing and 89.01% not appealing; and reorganization of grade levels to move 8th-grade students to the high schools and creating one 6th- and 7th-grade middle school received 13.82% appealing and 86.18% not appealing.

When asked to choose on a sliding scale, where the left side meant respondents would prefer a completely new middle school and the right side meant respondents would prefer a renovated middle school with an addition, respondents answered as follows:

A chart showing respondent selections on a scale of 1 to 100, with 0 being preference for a new middle school and 100 being preference for a new middle school. Respondents are in the following bands: 1-10, 963 respondents; 11-20 , 163 respondents; 21-30,145 respondents; 31-40, 129 respondents; 41-50, 292 respondents; 51-60, 207 respondents; 61-70, 126 respondents; 71-80, 120 respondents; 81-90, 91 respondents; 91-100, 510 respondents.

When asked to choose on a sliding scale, where the left side meant “I strongly prefer no tax increase, even if it means inadequate school facilities” and the right side meant “I strongly prefer a slight tax increase for high-quality school facilities,” respondents answered as follows:

A graph showing respondent selections with 0 being preference for no tax increase and 100 being preference for a slight tax increase. Respondents in ranges were as follows: 1-10, 366 respondents; 11-20, 73 respondents; 21-30, 90 respondents; 31-40, 111 respondents; 41-50, 300 respondents; 51-60, 335 respondents; 61-70, 230 respondents; 71-80, 212 respondents; 81-90, 152 respondents; 91-100, 971 respondents