001Well, hello there, Darcy. Good. How are you? ready. Okay, let's um open the work session 5 and we'll start today with the Mr. Ferson >> here >> Mr. here all present. It's a work session. We won't make any decisions, but we get to have discussion that kind of informal back and forth kind of outline for that. They're just going to kick us off and lead us through that. But as you know, primarily this is all based on getting the news on the best brand. we got kind of not all good news but certainly not all bad news. You know, there's a line there that we're just below. So has implications for some serious choices about what we do as a district relative to future best applications and relative to different bond options. So with that,
002I'm going to turn it over. >> Thank you. uh we have I think we're going to try to break this roughly into two parts. The first part is uh discussing best options and also getting thoughts and considerations from the board as well as we have a couple of guests uh Doug Abernathy from RTA and Len Hansen we work with previously on our mill levy to share some of the thoughts and experiences they've had with previous bonds. Um, I'll also share some stuff I learned from Kim Crawford from Butler and Snow, which is our bond council. That's who we worked with when we were writing the actual um language, ballot language previously for the for the mill levby. That's kind of part part one. And then part two, we want to talk uh with you about
003our potential poll that we're conducting. And so Katherine Han's here from New Brick Strategy. I said that right. Um and she will join us for the second half and give you kind of an overview. Here are the big buckets that we are polling on. And I think you'll remember from previous polls, it's not looking at the actual poll questions because you kind of can't release the poll questions into the wild before the poll. So it's the big ideas. What are we trying to sus out and figure out what's going on? So, I'll just start our discussion about the best grant by just recapping uh where we are and then kind of open that up for for questions. And there are no immediate questions and I suggest we pitch over to Doug or Len for some
004thoughts. So, um, we heard back from the from the best board that we were selected, uh, 18, uh, out of 53ish projects and, uh, that they were able to fund 17 of them. Uh interesting uh on the funding side, what was interesting to us is that the coop, which was um dollars that we were really poised to receive, they had just over just under $70 million available. And Kyoa was number one pick. I think this is their fourth year on the list with $68 million and a waiver from having to bring their match. Um, so the board, the best board waved them having to bring a match. So you had much smaller match, like 4 point something million dollars, less than five, more than 4.5 I believe. That's just me recalling. Um, so there weren't
005a lot of COP dollars to go on. Um, but there we saw ourselves sitting at the top of the list getting some what I would say is good feedback that our project was um, I said in the past, right size, right cost. Um and uh we demonstrated need. I am hopeful with where we landed, but I also want to be cautious. I went back through the last five years of best lists and best awards. It is not a guarantee to be just under the line and then receive an award the very next year. It's also difficult to track because of something uh in the best awards that allows uh money that was not uh used by people above you on the list to potentially trickle down to you. There are only two other or two
006projects, not two other two projects on the list that require uh ballot initiatives in order they have to bring their match in order to get those dollars. Um, and those two projects actually total about $33 million. It's possible uh that one or both of them won't pass their ballot initiative and those dollars start making their way down the list. Um, and so in the past that's been Kaiwa, you know, they didn't pass $70 million and then $70 million worth of projects up there got funded. The little caveat to that is uh if you choose to take money, so let's say $10,000 doesn't get passed and we say we'll take not 10,000 10 million and we say we'll take 10 million that's it that's what you get for your project. So you limit yourself from getting
007the total amount that best has said that they will match which is 40%. Um so there is some risk involved with taking taking that money. uh because of that it makes it difficult to track the list from year to year because some people are getting that award and so it wasn't it isn't visible in those two spreadsheets that I was preparing who's on the list and who got awarded. So while it's promising to be uh near the top it's not a guarantee not a guarantee but it's good good feedback questions just about that recap. Okay. So then that after talking to bond council Kim Crawford over at Butler and Snow uh there are two potentially three but really two options. um for the board to consider. One is uh do you want to ask the
008community to fund the project without best dollars? And so you can put that on out for uh for a vote this November. U another potential ballot is to say, would you want to ask for the match now contingent upon getting a vest in the future? And there's some legal language in there. Don't hold me accountable for the legal language. I'll just tell you the gist of it. The gist of it is you would say to the community um will you give us this much money to finish the project contingent on us receiving a best grant? And we can put some Kim was saying we could put some time limits on it next year and the next two years. Um the risk you run with it being open-ended is you say can we have the matching
009grant when we get on the best list and it takes four years to get on the best list. Now the match isn't enough for the project from I also spoke to the issuers of the bond steel and both steel and and Kim was like you can live through two years two cycles is probably good and much once you get out past that you start running the risk of potentially not being able to fund fund your project and have to go back and ask for more money. Um but that is a risk that comes with asking for a contingent. Also know that in the process for applying for best grant uh one of the questions we got from the best board was uh something in effect of we know you archetta folks don't pass uh bond
010initiatives which I tried to speak firmly against you can confirm or deny but I said well you know that's it's been a minute but you don't pass them. So, how what's your feeling that your community is going to support this? Um, if we were to get the matching dollars before we reapplied for FAST, that kind of puts that to Fed and they would say, "Oh, you have the money." If we were to ask for the match without the FAST dollars and it doesn't pass, that may be confirming to the best crew. They might say, "Well, look, you couldn't get the money anyways." So there there are always pluses and minuses when making making some of those those choices. I'll open again for questioning Dr. Taylor. Well, just on that last bit, I understand what what
011they're saying and what you're saying, but Kya did it several times, but they were still they weren't just booted out. In fact, it sounds like they were given quite a gift. >> That's correct. That's correct. They continued to press. Their community did not vote for it, I believe, three times. I don't think I'm overspeaking three times. I got pretty close the last time. Um I've heard one vote. I've heard 51 votes. I've heard both those numbers. >> I read it on >> you read one vote. >> The results that night they lost by one. >> Okay. So, um Yeah. And they were granted a waiver to say you don't have to bring the whole match in. I'm not sure how much that project has changed over time. But it does >> it did happen >>
012which is that point it's kind of a who knows right every year's one bit of advice I heard somewhere first you try to game this out and how this plays but you also say every year's a new year there's a new field and you're up against and have the board changes I think two new boardrooms next year so it's you're kind of start every year with a same man Nobody has your own experience how to write the brand feedback how to make it as strong as it can be. >> That's correct. >> Because it is a brand new application. Correct. Like you are not to submit >> verbatim in the same application per se, right? Like you would have to potentially give new specs, new finances. Like I don't possibly have to maybe do something
013different with a land rate. I don't know. you would have to intentionally ensure that everything is set to be turned in again. >> It's a new application. >> It's a brand new application. >> It is a new application and I'll let Doug speak to the how you read do the numbers, what's appropriate to do there. Um and certainly I I reached out to the best our Meg who's our contact through best uh through CDE and asked her to share the best board's feedback and that has not come out yet. But we will get specific scoring and feedback on our application and so we will know where there are opportunities for us to improve and where we've done well already on that. Doug, do you want to are you able to speak about the finance portion
014of it when you reapply? >> Yeah. And the when you reapply with with the grant when you reapply with the grant, the best thing to do is probably to go out Doug. >> We we're we're working on the sound for a second. Oh, >> okay. All right. Pretty sure it's us, not you. >> Is that better or are we still working on it? >> I can hear you just fine. So, it's them. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're good to go. >> Great. So what we would typically do is go back to those contractors that we talked to uh last time to help u confirm the budget amounts and ask them one to rein reconfirm those numbers and also tell us is there anything significant that has changed in the market that would necessitate us
015to make any changes to our grant application. Um, and they always ask the clarifying question is there, well, is there did you add scope? Did you change the project? Did you do any of that? Well, there may be a little bit of refinement that we would consider for that as we go through the process, but um, just reconfirming that with the general contractors and the state of the market is typically, Rick, what we would do. Do you want to just since we have you on there, do you want to share some of your other thoughts about where we are right now and what you've seen in your experience? >> Yeah, absolutely. So I I mean I think I think the application was very good and I think that proved proved itself in the ranking. The
016due diligence that's gone on both by the district. The amount of time that was spent by by Rick and Lisa and the district uh engaging the community I think was all very positive and actually I think it was it was a differentiator um in the project. I think the other thing that became apparent, we talked a little bit about this before um with Bob and Rick and I um just our observations is it wasn't that the project was lacking merit. It it was more about the finances that were available for best this year. And so I think the ranking of your project would have been higher overall if the funds would have been available because they only had a certain amount of funds available for coop and ka was in a unique situation because that
017building is failing. There are some significant life safety issues associated with it much like little different not as more extreme than what we have right now in Pagosa Springs. And the building is actually inside of a flood plane. um that there's some just fundamental issues associated with that project along with three years or four years worth of applications that put that at the top of the list. And so I think if funding would have different it would have been different from the state this year I think you would have seen something different at that point. That's probably my primary takeaway. I think the feedback from Meg, the questions she was asking during um during that period after submitt prior to the evaluation I think were all very constructive were helpful in the process and it
018just sort of demonstrated the commitment by the district, the community um uh to this project and the merit of this project also. So, I think um Brick is right that it doesn't guarantee anything, but I think all the fundamental things that B that best would look for in a project, I think this project checks all of those boxes. >> Doug, if you've been in this similar situation where you've worked with someone, you've got an application, you're >> quite make it the board is having decisions to make. Yeah, >> you work with folks. What have they decided to do? What's been the positives? >> So, the most recent example that we have that's very similar was Plaque Canyon School District in Bailey. Um, and it took two applications um to get a grant for that project.
019And I think the the board went in um committed to the project, the community was committed to the project. it just it the first year it the the bond failed um with the community and then the second year it passed and then the second year they got the best grant. And so I think one of the fundamental things that we learned from that application and that process is one that fundamentally the need was still there no matter what the outcome was with best and that the district continued to communicate that uh to the community and you know backed it all the way through the process. The other thing that we did do is as we were given that additional time, Rick, just like you talked about, we we went back and re reconfirmed the scope
020and the approach um to the project and and the cost and we're because of the familiarity the best board had with the project, it made it easier than the the next year um to to reapply. the familiarity was there and and you saw that um you saw that consistent support both from the community and the district um in that project. And so I I think that's probably the the key lesson that we've learned and we've seen that with other districts also um where they they they know the need is there and so they've stayed committed to the vision that's been set forward and they also and Rick we talked about this just a little bit but I just emphasize it a little bit is that because that need is there and because fundamentally you have
021support from you know there's a we have some support and some momentum in the community that that pausing that because of the setback from best is probably not the best thing to do because it that that need and that message still needs to continue to move forward in your community and with the best board and and demonstrate that commitment. >> Thanks. Are there questions for Doug while we have >> Yeah, Doug, this is Tim Taylor and I have a question and a comment. So the plat canyon has been there for quite a while as I recall. The question is do you know if black canyon went there second time contingent on the dust ground? Do you remember that language? >> I can't I can I let me get that from you. I it's been three
022years or so and so I can't remember exactly how the language changed from the first grant or the first bond um to the second bond but I will get that information for you. Um, I think the message stayed the same. I'm not sure if the if the Kim may understand it because Kim worked with us on that language also um on whether it changed or not, but I will get that for you. >> Right. Well, you mentioned just maybe three years ago what I recall that that Black Canyon school has been there for quite a long time. Was this a you're talking about the most recent desk >> or Yeah. and school because that's been there for quite some. >> The Yeah, the Yeah, the the the project completed uh the project completed uh two
023years ago this or a year ago this summer and so it it's several years ago that the best grant was approved. Um and then you know because of the you know we got about 9 to 9 to 12 months for design and then construction um you know that process is about two years and so um you're right it may be a little further back than that but it's once the money was approved that process to get the project done still takes a couple more years >> right and certainly that was in a time of greater best funding overall but um A little bit more. Yes. >> Yeah, a little bit more. I know it's been declining over a long period, but the comment is I don't want to seem overly optimistic, but the bottom line
024is since the best money had been 50 or million and change more presumably we would fund because we were the next on the line. To me, I look at that I can only look positive again what Rick said about everybody's all know there's no absolutely but if there had been 50 50 million more we would have been funded there it is so I think it's everything to be optimistic about the application that was put in clearly was looked on very effectively and I think that's than you before thank you again but I have everything to be optimistic about myself so I'm sure a lot of credit goes to RTA they are the primary architect of those applications and Kelsey and I wrote wrote some of it. They're the they're the folks that carried us to
025the finish line like hey make sure we include this do that restructure this. So it was a it was definitely a team effort. I'm very very grateful and certainly a lot of this is anecdotal in my brain. I don't remember maybe Doug you can remember me or rifle a few years ago. It seems like they had to go back more than once and it talking to board members at the Cathy convention every year. I don't ever recall when said, "Yeah, we were we were shut up because we didn't pass the first time." I just haven't heard that. I'm sure it's probably happened that board was a bias that your bond went back down 9010 or something like that. So, you have no chance. I don't know. But most of the time, it seems like people
026are funding if they keep reapply. >> Yeah, it's a little bit of a chicken and egg over the last 10 years or so. whether or does a a best grant guarantee a bond success or does a bond success guarantee best best success? And I I think it's probably like baseball, it's somewhere in the middle, right? Like there's no clear there's no clear path for it at that point. And so just like you referenced, there's examples like Rifle, like uh like Bailey and and Plat Canyon, like uh Grand Junction with their high school. Um there are examples like that across the board. The other thing that was positive, I think, in the in the application is the board's commitment to do more than than the minimum for match. And I also think that is you know
027something that is also good. Um that changes every year or two years the match for for best and that is something that you would you know that you would have to consider um you know for another application because there's no guarantee the number will stay the same at this point. >> Thanks. Thanks Doug. I just also want to remind the board we'll we'll have the benefit this year of explicit feedback from the best board and while they are changing to members the bulk of the group will be the same and so those places where uh we could have done better we we will be able to add add more information. We also have um Len on here and I want to make sure we get a chance to to talk to Len and maybe you
028could just start by sharing some of your thoughts and let the board follow up with questions. Yeah, happy to. I also have the Plaque Canyon language uh that I can put up if you guys really want to see it. So, in 20 in 22 they lost with 40% of the vote. Uh and in 23 they won with 51% and they did change the way they asked the question. Um which is uh one of the things you'll hear me talk about a lot is how you write the title and what it says is really important. Um so I'm happy to put those up if somebody wants to see them. I can also just send them to you so you don't have to pull them up, Doug. Um, I just was able to pull them up while
029you were talking. Um, so I I will tell you that I was really impressed that you guys came in as the first backup project. Um, I'm from over by Kyoa, so I can tell you how bad that school is and um, how much they deserve it. Um, they have been going at this, they've done it for four years and have lost four years in a row. Um, and it's almost always with uh 46 to 48% of the vote that they lose. Um, which is only like 50 votes in that small of a community, but um, it's been very challenging for them. And what that challenge meant is it made it very challenging for you guys to make it through the best process this year. Uh, with that hanging out there, um, I think I agree
030100% with what I just heard Doug say, which was, um, I think you make it through next year and I think you should go on the ballot this year and, uh, my recommendation would be to go on the ballot and to be asking only for the amount you need in addition to the best grant. Um, and not go for a a full ask. Um, I'm not sure your community is is ready for that large of a financial impact. And now that they know that this is a possibility of having a match. I mean, if I was a voter, I don't know why I would say yes. I'd want you to go for the match again. Um, I'd want you to use less of my money and more of the matching money. So, um, I'm happy
031to talk through more. We've also got Katherine on who could talk through the poll. Um, in case you didn't see that she had gotten on, um, but happy to answer any questions. So you're you're you're making a pretty firm recommendation to put something on the ballot and have it be contingent on receiving the full best, right? >> On receiving the best award. I think we probably are going to talk about what those numbers are when we get into talking about what we want to pull. Um, but I am saying don't go for 100% funded out of your community and make it contingent on getting some state money. >> So that you know feels right to be also one of those options we have is be on the ballot for the full amount and that doesn't
032seem like a good idea. Then there's the wait a year and wait to see if we get the best. Then we kind of lose the momentum. That doesn't seem like a good idea. So, in my mind, if you're going to be on the ballot, it's what what the ask is from the community. >> Yes. And I think we can talk about what number you want to say that the best match is. Um because Doug is also incredibly accurate about the fact that some of those numbers can change along the way. Um the superintendent talked about the fact that some of this could come open. So, you've got to decide, are you okay with only 30 million of a match? Um, if if both of those were to fail this November, um I think it was
03334 3 just over 33 million um for the two of them. And so, I think what we talk about that number being of how much of it gets matched by best is something we can all have a conversation about. But yes, I'm strongly recommending you keep your momentum going. you put something on the ballot this year and that it's not 100% of the funding you are going to go after best. >> How do you handle the other possible things that Yeah, I'll speak a little bit. part of the part of the polling is really for us to determine um what's the interest interest there uh in a conversation uh with with with Le and Katherine. Katherine get into we talk specifically about that like what's the threshold that the community wants you know the match
034is X um well what about X plus 5 what about X plus 10 where is there a limit or they give us the feedback like X the match is what it is um that's that's why we want to kind of test u before we operate our you know our personal assumptions of how that's going to go uh the previous polling kind of gave us some direction. So that's was for that too. >> Yeah, I think you can look at the poll as giving you two pieces of really important intel. One is where your community is on the dollar amounts and the other is where they are on priorities of what it is you're funding. So um is it uh is the community at a place where they say build the new school, get the match,
035and that's it. or do they feel like some of the other things we can present them with as additional opportunities around the high school and um other other extra projects um that could be built into that whether they find those of value and that increases uh their likelihood of support >> and Catherine will walk through the actual mechanism for how we're going to do that when we get to that section of the meeting. And can you pass it on with some of this other stuff? Is it all contingent started by getting the best grants or is it just the one big project? >> It is my understanding and I am not a bond council lawyer. My understanding from consulting one Kim Crawford who referred to color is that if we put an amount on there
036said not to exceed X which is the way it's typically written contingent on a best grant. It's all all of those dollars become contingent on receiving the best grant. it it wasn't possible to separate it say can we have x y amount to do special projects and x amount as the match and get access to some and that the rest of an all all another that's my current understanding I'm open to being wrong >> that's correct >> other other questions for the group or for len or Doug while we have them here just looking at the time they can a couple minutes who want to switch over to talk about the the poll a little bit but I imagine there's still more questions just if you're indications or awareness of what else might be going
037to the ballot in November um I think that has a huge like swing possibility and ends up, you know, in the voters. So, do you have any insight? >> Um, I I would two two pieces of insight from the work I've been doing with the community conversations series. One is that we are we would be the only entity asking for an increase in mills if we went for a bond. If you decide to go for bond, the hospital is asking to continue with their current rate as they debrief which removes some of the chamber requirements, allows them access to the current funding that they're getting and grant funding. I believe that was Monday night. Y and then um the county is going to be is planning on being on the ballot. I don't think they've
038officially said it yet, but I think they're headed that way. That would be my assumption at this point. and they are asking to look at Roger's house which will not be an increased mill and so where there was a time maybe a few months ago where we were hearing rumors that maybe an entity was also going to go for a mill and there might be two of us forced someone to choose the hospital initiative. It is my understanding that the hospital initiative will be without increasing taxes. Although some folks would tell you it would have gone away. So it's really not taxes, but that's the way it's allowed to be written. And so we're not really in competition uh necessarily with those two. We're probably most heavily in competition with the gas pump uh and
039just the general general economy right now which is not ideal. We okay if we pivot to the looks like L I don't know if you want to do any transition there or Katherine you just want to start your mind forward I guess before you are and then u talk about the big buckets on the on the potential poll. >> Yeah happy to do just a a quick transition. Um so Katherine is joining us. You guys had to hear me present the poll results last time. Um but Katherine was the one who had actually done the poll. So now you get the actual expert um and not just my take on it. Um so this will be her second time polling for um you guys last year and then again this year. And so she's going
040to walk you through sort of the buckets of what we want to talk about. Um and Rick brought this up at the beginning, but we don't want to put out um what the exact questions are that we're considering asking because um in your community it's very likely that somebody who sees this may actually get the poll. um and we don't want to sort of bias our own results before we're even out in the field. So, she's going to walk through in a little more general with you about what it is we'll be talking about and then um we can take questions from there. So, Katherine, go for it. Sounds good. Hi everyone. Uh good to see you. Thank you so much uh Len for that introduction. Um, we are planning to be in the field
041in late June, early July with a survey in your community. Um, what that's going to look like is we are planning to interview anywhere from 250 to 300 voters. Um, which is representative of a community of your size. Um in fact it tends to be quite difficult to get to this um level of responses in your community given uh the size uh the size of the community. But we feel confident that this sample size um is representative. Uh for some context we interview about 500 to 600 voters statewide when we're doing work across Colorado. Uh and when we're doing national work uh we interview anywhere from 800 to a thousand voters. So 250 to 300 is a robust sample size for your community. Um it's a margin of error of about 6%. Um if we
042go any higher than that in terms of your sample size, we really only get very small uh returns on that margin of error. Um and trying to get that lower. So um we're really feeling good about that sample size. Um again it's also uh difficult to get uh completed interviews in in the community in this community. So um we're really not sure we can really exceed 300. Um in fact we're going to be in the field for um about 12 to 15 hopefully 12-ish days um which is a lot longer than we might be in the field in any other community. um just given we want to make sure that we're reaching people um in all walks of life. Um we talk to folks um online and over the phone. Uh so we send out
043text message invitations uh so that people can respond to the survey uh in that way at their convenience. Um they can also receive email invitations as well to participate in an online survey. Uh, and then we're doing that traditional polling methodology where we're calling folks on their cell phones, in some cases, landlines. Yes, there are still people who have landlines. Um, but we are doing fewer of those interviews uh just because there aren't quite uh as many landlines out there anymore and the bulk of our interviews will be uh on cell phones and um online. uh we make sure when we're interviewing that um at the end of fielding uh we have a representative uh sample of your community. So that means that we're looking we're modeling uh a 2026 uh electorate in this case
044since you all are looking at putting something on the ballot this November. So, we are modeling what that turnout would look like in your community and we're making sure that the the group of interviews we get by at the end of the process uh is representative of that audience. Um because 2026 voters, someone who's voting this November looks very different than someone who's going to vote um in let's say a 2024 election or a 2025 election. Uh so we make sure that um we're dialed in on the audience as well uh so that we're being as representative uh as possible. Um that's a bit about the methodology. Um I'm happy to answer some questions about that um after I go through the general buckets of what we're planning to test. Um, of course, with board
045approval, um, we are planning to test, uh, actual ballot language or as close of an approximation as we can possibly get. Um, given whatever mechanism you all decide to go forward with, uh, as well as the amount you decide to go forward with as well. Um, we like to test um and prefer to test and strongly recommend that we test as close of an approximation to the ballot language as we possibly can because it has all of that legal language and um technical language in there. Um, so sometimes you might see polling where uh something is asked about in concept like do you support raising taxes for schools? It's very easy for someone to say yes of course I love my schools. I support the schools in my area. Um, but when it actually gets
046down to uh the nitty-gritty of the ballot language, we want to make sure that um we're getting people's um voters um first blush reactions to um quite technical um kind of difficult to get through language. Um you all know, you all have voted here in Colorado. Some of the ballot language could be quite um quite dense. Um, so we'd like to test uh actual ballot language. Um, and then we'll have a couple of questions uh related to the ballot language in particular. Um, giving folks an opportunity to tell us why they would vote yes or no on the language. Uh, and a few other core uh core questions. Uh, then we also intend to ask um voters about some specific projects. Uh you all mentioned the the projects related to the high school. Um and
047we'll have a couple of uh sections related to those projects. We'll be able to sus out uh how important voters feel uh the high school projects are uh in terms of funding priority uh and then also uh some willingness to pay uh around those uh projects as well. Um, we'll fi we'll also simulate some pro proarguments and some con arguments uh for the ballot language. Uh, and then we will of course have a smattering of demographic questions to ensure not only we're reaching uh the right audience as I mentioned uh in terms of gender and age uh in your community and also where it where they reside in the community. Um but also some additional demographic questions like party and length of residence. Um so that we can analyze the data in a way that's
048helpful for you helpful for um uh you all going into into the fall. >> Catherine and the whole group. This is Tim Taylor. A couple questions. With regard to the ballot language that you use, is does anyone know if the joint budget committee has finalized the Colorado budget? Do we know how many dollars are available for best? Is that part of the same big bucket or is best separate that we decided later? In other words, what do we know what percentages or what the percentage of best money will be for next year because it will change? Lena, you're on mute. >> Thanks. I was gonna say I'm gonna punt that one to someone else. Um uh so and Doug might be able to add to this as well. So it is not part of um
049the general fund budget that is signed by the governor um and done by the legislature. It's actually funded u mostly by um excess. It's um excise sorry not excess excise tax on marijuana um and it's the excise tax is on the growers when they sell it to those who are making the product um or uh or to the retail stores. So, not the the people who are buying the product in store, but the people who are selling the product to the store to sell. Um, that is the money that makes up the best fund. And so, every year they have to make up some estimates about what is coming in and then they do that work. Doug, I don't know if you know the time frame. I can't remember uh when they do all of
050that. Um, but it is not part of what what has passed. Tim, >> yeah, you're you're right, Len. It's typically they have an understanding of it as they get close to the end of the year based on what revenue has done and then they have a forecast for for where revenue is going to be at based on where the trends are for that for that excise tax. And so there's no firm dollar um amount. It's roughly the same dollar amount. that's gone down the last few years. Um, but it doesn't get finalized until we get closer to the end of the calendar year and the beginning of next calendar year. And then the other thing that Len, maybe you and I can tag team this a little bit. The other thing that the COP dollars
051are generated a little bit differently from public land and those dollars are only available based on where they are um in availability of of encumbering those dollars again based on debt they've already retired and so they'll probably as we move into the I would assume the third or fourth quarter of this year we'll start to have an understanding of will there be any funds available from the public lands for coops that they use. Is that fair, Len? >> It is. So, it's exactly like what you were uh what Rick was just talking about with the hospital where you have debt. Um and now you're going to without increasing taxes continue that debt. It's exactly the same thing on the state public land side. So, they're they have to figure out how much of that is
052available for them to continue. uh which then means they can issue new cops with >> okay so circulating back to the poll question without getting into the weeds too much here we we cannot say an exact amount but if you pull it you can't say an exact amount you could say an approximate amount is that what we're looking at is that how that language would go again without trying I'm not trying to presuppose anything but yes can't know what we don't know so yes about the poll Yep. So when we write these ballot titles, so I'm going to talk about it two ways. One, when we pull it and then one when we write it with you for what you would refer to the ballot. So when we write it to pull it, we are
053trying to get it as close as possible as we can. But then several of the things in the poll may help us make it even better. So, let's say we decide to test a title that does not include extra projects, but then later in the poll, we see, you know what, this extra project X, and I'm just I'm intentionally not naming anything, extra project X really pulled well. We need to put it back up into the title. So, then we go and fix the titles and make more recommendations to you before you put it on the ballot to make it better. for the dollar amounts. Um, this is a bit of an interesting game we have to play where you're trying to get them as close to the amount you think it is, but not
054less than. So, you always have to estimate high because you can only do up to whatever number you give. You can always go less. But the higher you make that number, the harder it makes it for some of people in your community to vote yes. So, it's this balancing act a little bit between where do we think it's going to be and making sure that it's not it doesn't come in above that. So do I understand though that we will be able to test sensitivity of voters to what the total bond ask could be relative to how big our best ask is. So in other words, we we could always ask for the full best amount or if polling says people would support the bond if maybe more if we were equally if we asked
055for a little bit less from death. I'm just kind of playing the odds game. If we're asking for less and our voters are equally supportive of 40 million as 50 million, it would be good to know that it might improve our odds that in the best process if we're asking for less. So we we have a sense of that that two slice of the cake too thin. >> So I'm going to let Katherine get into the nitty-gritty, but I'm going to tell you that most people don't know the difference between 40 and 50 million in terms of what that really means. Um, so instead when we pull when Katherine just said we're going to look at some of these projects and talk about how much would you be willing to pay for this project, it
056gives us an idea of how much they're willing to go up. Um, if you were a larger community, if you were, for example, Denver, then we do things called split samples and ask a third of you one thing and a third and a third and see how it does with different amounts. But if I ask you, would you pay for 40 million or 50 million? very few of you are going to vote for the 50 million. You'd all vote for the 40 million, right? Because that's just human nature. I want more for less. Um and so Katherine and um those in the industry who poll have found different ways to try to do this. So it's not going to be as straight and pretty of an ask you would like where we can say if
057you do it at 50, this is where it's at. And if you do it at 40, this is where it's at. And if you do it at 30, this is where it's at. Instead, we're having to put several things together to give you an idea for where that'd be. So, Katherine, do you want to get more specific on that? >> Yeah. No, that was a a a beautiful explanation, Len. Um, uh, this is tricky because really, as Len said, we're trying to balance the size of your community and the number of completed interviews we can achieve. Um, and not cutting the survey up into so many ways that we don't have a statistically significant response on these um, on different choices. So, we're going to start with just our best guess, our best estimate, as
058close as we can to what that um best match would be, plus as Len said, a little cushion um to make sure that we're covered there. Um, and then the extra what we're calling the extra projects would then be in a completely different section so that we're able to ask those of everyone who completes the survey and we're not splitting the sample in too many ways and getting into really dangerous territory in terms of the margin of error being out of control. Right? Because with 300 voters, we're sitting at a margin of error of 6%. Which means that if we ask this one ballot of everyone, that number, if we come in at 50%, that means that we could either be at 56% or we could be at 44%. On actual election day, rate. So,
059we really don't want that number to get um any higher. And that's why we're going with this approach, which is let's take our best guess at what that number should be. Um, knowing what your community potentially could tolerate. Uh, and then getting into the nitty-gritty of any extras um, extras later in the survey. So, so I understand I was only using 40 and 50 million as the numbers that would translate down into the amount that it impacts me on a tax basis. So either you still would get some sensitivity about if if per 500,000 cost me $100 I support that. But if per 500,000 it cost me $150 I don't support that. There's some sensitivity about what the level of a a little bit. So, when we write ballot titles, um, and I've I've talked
060with you guys about this a little bit before that we've done a whole lot of research work around how to best structure these ballot titles. One of the things that we do in a ballot title is say what it will mean either for a typical home or a per $100,000 um valuation of a home to give a person a real idea for what it means for them. Then in the poll, we are actually moving away from that because that's a lot of math. So imagine I said if you would like to build a home on Pluto, how much would you be willing to pay per $100,000 per year, right? That's just too much math. It's too esoteric for someone. So instead, we're trying to get a feel for what would you pay a month for
061that? $10, $20, $1,000? and then we will on the back end group some of that and come up with some ideas for you of what that can mean. Um it is really interesting with voters. Um I'm going to use a more simplified um example because sales tax is just easier to talk about than mill levies are because there's so much math behind a mill levy. But when we tell someone in a poll 25 cents on a $100 purchase is a 0.25% 25% sales tax or you could pay 50 cents on a $100 purchase for a 0.5% sales tax. We don't see a lot of difference between those when we pull because people are like 25 cents, 50 cents, whatever, right? Like it's just it doesn't have enough of an impact into them. If we do
06210 cents versus a dollar, now we've gotten a big enough range that people are like, I get the difference between 10 cents and a dollar. And it's not like of course intellectually they get the difference between 25 cents and 50 cents. They just don't get the difference of what it means to them. And so like in terms of real harm to their pocketbook or what it really will cost. So part of what this is doing is taking what we already know about voter behavior and trying to give them a way to to tell us how they're feeling without over complicating it so that they can't actually answer us. So, um, or >> you're gonna have to lean way closer to the mic. Sorry. >> Um, if you guys are expecting to potentially start polling in
063three weeks, um, what is your process from this meeting to actual polling? Um, and how are we if not involved in that process to just or are we not involved in that process that rip that is kind of meshing this over because it just doesn't seem very tangible in this conversation for probably many reasons, but I'm curious of we have three weeks. What are we doing from here on until you're trying to pull what the >> So, I'm happy to take that, but do you want to Rick or you want me to? Yeah, I think you guys are gonna be working on the project while I'm floating. So, I think you can talk about what you're doing in the next couple of weeks while I'm not here and then what we're doing when I get
064back. >> Um, so I'm more menty uh who is officially signing off. So, uh we're working with Rick on it. Um and that is how most of these get done at um at school levels because otherwise it has to be done in a um open public meeting. and we've kind of talked about why you don't want all of these polling questions out there in front of it um before the poll is released. So, what we're hoping to get from you guys a little bit tonight is some feeling about are there extra projects you want to make sure we have in the list? Are there specific scenarios around some of these dollars you would like us to consider as we're putting all of this information together? And then the timeline is Katherine and I are working
065um I'm already gonna tag Doug in because now that he's been on the call. Sorry Doug, you just got tagged in as well. But um along with Kim who is um bond counsel to really fine-tune on how we're going to ask the title on this question so that we can get a very good clean read for you on where your community is on supporting this. Um that'll be sort of over the three weeks. um Rick comes back into town and we will spend the last couple of days right before we start fielding getting his sign off and approval on everything. So really, we're hoping that we can get some of that input from you right now about if you've got things that are burning for the list of extra projects um that you want to
066make sure that we're testing on or if you've got specific scenarios like I told you that I think you should go for um an amount and then have part of it guaranteed by a best matching amount and I didn't give you dollar amounts intentionally so that we could have more of this conversation about what you'd like to see those dollar amounts be. But if you want to just go pull on let's just straight ask the entire community to fund this thing, then we need to know that. >> I don't think anyone said that. >> I I have to use the extreme examples because it makes it easier. So is is what you're asking is we we had the polling last year had other projects that were how did they impact the likelihood of Yes. Right.
067So do you want us to go over those again or do you want to talk about what they were and see if those are still the right ones? >> So we've in our minds we've got several things around the high school um that were in there. Um, we also tested several things if we weren't doing the depending on where the school is located or depending on what kind it was. You've already now narrowed that down this year. So, we don't have to reask some of those because those are wrapped into that bond project. So most of these are focused in over on all of the things that we're either with the high school um alternative charter programs that kind of stuff are all of the extras we are currently looking at testing. But if you've
068got if you've got something on your mind you want to make sure we're testing, you don't have to say it today. You can also just send it to us. But >> but but you have the list from last year and right now you'd be testing on the same unless we add something or change something. >> So are you are you looking at the Oh, sorry Rick. I was going to say I use a list that have earlier operated off of a potential other projects um in around the high school high school systems high school fields high school additional space mountain school and of course that's the big rundown of those lists and then um we actually there's in the poll we'll be able to be really specific about projects like we think you have an
069H track system at the high school and then on the ballot language we'll look at all corrected and what was voted like favor what tested favorably and put that language together. So we asking is there anything anyone's thought of since a year ago >> that should be on other projects list. >> This is Tim Taylor. I don't remember exactly what was on that last year but we had I don't think we finalized it but the list that I just summarized myself was the baseball field. They're really the needy things. Of course, I think they're all neat and the San Juan Mountain School. Now, whether we choose to do that some other way, that's still something we can talk about. The gym, the PPOS, and the auxiliary, renovation of the high school stadium complex, which is,
070I would say, almost dire. And then potential athletic buildings within that city. I believe we have all of those. >> I will say Tim, you cut out for just a second on one of them and I'm pretty sure you said auxiliary. Jim, um, was the word? Yeah. >> Okay. Yes, we're gonna ask about I think enough people are aware of the extreme temperatures that everyone on the south side of the building faces we've been talking about. We also talked about that expensive expensive >> and all of that money would be tied into there's no other way to use the polling information to potentially put on separate things in November like separate >> are you talking about on the ballot where you'd want to have two questions one that was contingent on best and another question
071that was not contingent on best >> I mean I think for some of the external like extra projects. I would be interested to know that, but I don't I don't know how it comes down >> from a voting perspective if that's strengthened or weakens anything. It's just >> don't want to compete with yourself. >> Correct. I don't want to compete with myself and and I I'm just talking through this process too and it just seems to think that some of these projects are continued again on the same timeline as us going back in for best. So for me with feeling this urgency of some things, it's that I think some things to consider that I've learned from uh talking to steeple. There are ways that we want to consider structuring the debt. The high school's
072already got 30 years on it. So we want to structure our debt so that the people who come after us 10 or 15 years are starting to think about man maybe we need a high school that we might also leave the district in a position where they can say without uh adding to debt. Could we extend our debt so that we can do some of this work and that could be on different time timelines and there's way to think about it. It's also entirely possible that some of the high school work like the HVAC system that we talked about which has a very hefty price tag um that we would after this cycle preapply for best is just because we've gotten a best grant um for our new school doesn't exclude us from getting best
073grants for for other projects. So we might apply for a best grant to get that partially funded. Um we might also delay some if we didn't see there's a lot of interest in some of these other project other projects to be named that we didn't see a lot of interest or the people were telling us through the poll we really want to support the match we're unsure about the rest then we would have you would have a decision to make like are you going to pursue the match or are you going to wait until there's interest in both you can always go back to the voters again and um with some to say, "Hey, we're ready now to to do this next next project." Len, correct me if I was wrong in any any of
074that. >> Um, I don't I don't think I heard anything wrong. I would just say that if again, if we pulled two questions and we said, "Would you increase taxes by 9 million to do these five things, and would you increase taxes by 76 million to do this one thing?" You'll cannibalize yourself. um people will be less likely to support your your P through eight and more likely to only support the extra projects when you ask it. That's why it polling gets tough. It it's not a perfect thing. We can't just sort of ask everything exactly the way we wish we could and get the answers. Um it would be, you know, four or five polls to be able to do all of that. So that's why Katherine and I are trying to work on
075developing stuff that helps give you some answers. Even if it's not a direct we asked it exactly the way you you want. We can try to put some things together and say these look like they could be added or these really are not. And I do realize how frustrating that answer is. >> I know. I'm sorry. I wish I had a a perfect solution. want to uh thank you all uh for participating. I'm just watching the time here and I know we have some uh special guests here tonight for retirement. So just making sure everyone's aware of the time. There a couple more questions or some discussion to be had just anyone that kind of just one final estimate of of the time frame for us to see these questions before they're actually >> I'm
076sorry I couldn't hear that one. So the time frame in which the board members and the administration will see the questions before you actually go to poll. >> So um currently and this is up to you guys but currently Rick will see them right after he gets back from his vacation before we go into the field. So we essentially set it up that we charge with based on discussion and the input and based on the stereo agree on the final question that get rather than have all the input. >> Yeah. And I think the the one question where we want to get kind of uh yeah that's the right direction. It's around this idea. we it would be uh I think it'd be very difficult to test do you want to pay for the whole
077project or do you want to pay just for the part the matching part and so we do have to get a little agreement among the group like yeah can continue down the road let's still test it isn't committing you that you're going to run any ballot or that one but you're just testing it could we test the contingent one just to see how it goes and I just that's one that we would need to know like Yeah, that's the right direction. Then I believe we could take it from there. >> Didn't we hold both of those offers the first time? We collectively kind of passed it in different ways. Wait, so we're saying we cannot do that again? >> I believe we're saying now is if you were to say, do you want to pay
078the whole amount or do you want to pay 60% of it? People are going to say 60% sounds great, right? So we're not gonna ask that because that's that's an audience. >> Would be a terrible question. Well, so the way that we asked it last time, Amanda, is that we basically said, "Would you fund the whole thing?" And then we went back and said, "Now, what if we told you we could get some matching dollars? Does that make you more likely?" The problem with that structure now that we are more likely to do the match side is that we can't ask the ballot title in a clean way to get a real read on where people would be if we only asked them for the amount that is the match. So, we would get a
079clean read on the fund everything and then a sort of read on the give it the match. We're suggesting to you you really sh should probably want a clean read on just doing the match. >> Right. Right. So, I think I think we're all understanding that we're not going to ask if you support fund the whole thing because that road doesn't make sense to go down. And so, we are going for a match. I I was only asking questions earlier about what level of batch and how we figure all that out your science project there. But the level of batch that we go for, how much sensitivity does that have to voter support? But we're definitely in the we're going for a best grant a gain and we want the community to support a match,
080not the whole thing. True. That's that's good place for us to start to pursue that. We're not committing to that or just simply exploring it. We're seeing what the community wants to say back to us. I do appreciate how the board is consistently waiting to listen to see what the board thinks what the community thinks. So good good step to to continue that process. Um, Katherine, the results we would have back in time for the board to look at and discuss. >> I forgot that timeline. >> Yes, we I'm pulling it up right now. We had planned to have data back around July 8th with a key findings deck about a week later. So July 14th, you all would have everything from us um for the I believe there's a July 28th meeting. Is that
081correct? >> Third. Yes. I think it might be the third but somewhere in there July meeting I'm sorry August we had a June June meeting sorry be the next regular >> regular meeting people are available and around there uh I've heard from some community members that you know what about the timeline if there is a decision to go for something that campaign campaigning window starts to get small so I think they're encouraging to be as agile as we can be. No, by no means rush, but take advantage of the time we have. >> The time frame you said, Katherine, was around the 14th of July. Is that right? >> Yes, you should have everything from my firm by the 14th of July. So that would include the data and then our key findings, recommendations. Your
082point is we need to make a decision on whether or not and what would be question sooner than quicker in campaign. >> That's correct. Yeah, we have some we're well ahead of timelines when we have to announce those things. So that's not the concern. I think the concern is getting getting organized. While we're on that closebody unavailable last two weeks of July on of the 22 we do it as a as a suggested action the stronghold. >> Yeah, we got figure that out but I think we're just checking available on that. I think we need to wrap it up. We really appreciate all of you there on the camera. Thank you all for your thoughts and expertise get good information to make smart decisions here. >> Yes. And I would just say because I know
083Rick is going to be out um uh several of you know how to reach me. So um if you have anything in the meantime while Rick is gone, feel free to reach directly over to over to me. Tim, I know you for sure have my email address and could share it with folks over there. >> Thank you. Thanks everyone. I really appreciate the support. It's been a strong team. Thanks for keeping it together. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. >> Thank you.