Thompson School Board approves resolution to place $99 million bond on November ballot
August 07, 2025 | Thompson School District R-2J, School Districts , Colorado
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Thompson School District R-2J Board of Education on Aug. 6 approved a resolution to place a $99 million general-obligation bond question on the Nov. 4, 2025 ballot, voting 6-1 after a special meeting discussion about assessed valuation assumptions and ballot language.
The bond question, presented by Assistant Superintendent of Operations Todd Piccone, would finance facilities maintenance, safety and security, growth-related capacity and educational program enhancements while maintaining the district's current debt-service mill levy for collections in 2026 under the district's plan.
The measure lists three broad spending buckets: $35 million for critical facility needs, $10 million for safety and security, and roughly $44 million for growth-related projects, with an additional $10 million earmarked for educational enhancements. The district and its municipal adviser, Maddie Perdonovic of Hilltop Securities, told the board the $99 million par amount is based on a 7.5% aggregate assessed-value growth assumption across the district's three counties.
"If assessed value does not pan out as we would expect, that would just mean that we don't issue all of the par upfront and would wait for assessed value to continue to grow to be able to issue all of it," Perdonovic said.
Perdonovic said preliminary county estimates the district obtained in May showed differing trends: Weld County's assessed value is anticipated to fall about 8% (driven largely by oil-and-gas valuation changes), Boulder County was expected to rise about 4% to 5%, and Larimer County provided a preliminary estimate that had been as high as 20% but was expected to be revised downward. The $99 million figure assumes Larimer's assessed value would rise by about 8.2% under the combined assumption.
Bond consultant Kim Crawford explained legal constraints and ballot wording required under state rules, including limits imposed by TABOR (the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights). Crawford told the board the ballot language states the district does not expect a tax-rate increase for 2026 collections, but that TABOR and state law set maximum repayment totals and annual repayment limits the district cannot exceed. Crawford said the district's current annual debt service is about $19 million and that figure will drop to about $15.6 million next year as prior bonds roll off; she described how an interest-focused structure early in the new bonds would limit near-term tax impact and shift principal amortization into later years.
Board members asked for greater specificity in the ballot language and voter materials. Board member Nancy Rumpelt argued the ballot should start by plainly stating the district is increasing debt and listed concerns that the current question format could understate that fact. Rumpelt voted against the resolution and said the board had not followed the district's usual process of a study session with public comment before placing a bond on the ballot.
Other board members and staff said they had worked over the summer to tighten the proposal after the unsuccessful 2024 election and to assemble more detailed, school-level information for a district website and voter materials. Crawford said the district will publish a website and printable materials showing the specific types of work and school-level allocations after the board's approval and that a citizen bond oversight committee will monitor spending and report to the board.
If the resolution stands, staff will proceed with required election steps, including certification with county clerks and following the limits of the Fair Campaign Practices Act for what district staff may communicate. The board took the roll-call vote after discussion and passed the resolution 6 to 1.
Votes at a glance: Yes — Stu Boyd, Denise Chapman, Amy Doran, Dawn Kirk, Barbara Cruz, Alexandra Lesson; No — Nancy Rumpelt. Motion text (as moved): approve the resolution calling for the election on 11/04/2025.
The board adjourned the special meeting after the vote and moved to a brief break before resuming other work.
The bond question, presented by Assistant Superintendent of Operations Todd Piccone, would finance facilities maintenance, safety and security, growth-related capacity and educational program enhancements while maintaining the district's current debt-service mill levy for collections in 2026 under the district's plan.
The measure lists three broad spending buckets: $35 million for critical facility needs, $10 million for safety and security, and roughly $44 million for growth-related projects, with an additional $10 million earmarked for educational enhancements. The district and its municipal adviser, Maddie Perdonovic of Hilltop Securities, told the board the $99 million par amount is based on a 7.5% aggregate assessed-value growth assumption across the district's three counties.
"If assessed value does not pan out as we would expect, that would just mean that we don't issue all of the par upfront and would wait for assessed value to continue to grow to be able to issue all of it," Perdonovic said.
Perdonovic said preliminary county estimates the district obtained in May showed differing trends: Weld County's assessed value is anticipated to fall about 8% (driven largely by oil-and-gas valuation changes), Boulder County was expected to rise about 4% to 5%, and Larimer County provided a preliminary estimate that had been as high as 20% but was expected to be revised downward. The $99 million figure assumes Larimer's assessed value would rise by about 8.2% under the combined assumption.
Bond consultant Kim Crawford explained legal constraints and ballot wording required under state rules, including limits imposed by TABOR (the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights). Crawford told the board the ballot language states the district does not expect a tax-rate increase for 2026 collections, but that TABOR and state law set maximum repayment totals and annual repayment limits the district cannot exceed. Crawford said the district's current annual debt service is about $19 million and that figure will drop to about $15.6 million next year as prior bonds roll off; she described how an interest-focused structure early in the new bonds would limit near-term tax impact and shift principal amortization into later years.
Board members asked for greater specificity in the ballot language and voter materials. Board member Nancy Rumpelt argued the ballot should start by plainly stating the district is increasing debt and listed concerns that the current question format could understate that fact. Rumpelt voted against the resolution and said the board had not followed the district's usual process of a study session with public comment before placing a bond on the ballot.
Other board members and staff said they had worked over the summer to tighten the proposal after the unsuccessful 2024 election and to assemble more detailed, school-level information for a district website and voter materials. Crawford said the district will publish a website and printable materials showing the specific types of work and school-level allocations after the board's approval and that a citizen bond oversight committee will monitor spending and report to the board.
If the resolution stands, staff will proceed with required election steps, including certification with county clerks and following the limits of the Fair Campaign Practices Act for what district staff may communicate. The board took the roll-call vote after discussion and passed the resolution 6 to 1.
Votes at a glance: Yes — Stu Boyd, Denise Chapman, Amy Doran, Dawn Kirk, Barbara Cruz, Alexandra Lesson; No — Nancy Rumpelt. Motion text (as moved): approve the resolution calling for the election on 11/04/2025.
The board adjourned the special meeting after the vote and moved to a brief break before resuming other work.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
