Glasgow Public Schools

**Day 25 Tidbit** How common are artificial turfs in our region? Do other Eastern Montana communities have similar track and football facilities? There are TWENTY SIX (26) Artificial turf football fields in Montana and counting. All 7 public/private Universities will have the surface in 2024, 13 out of 16 Class AA schools play on turf, 9 Class A’s, and 4 current Class B/C schools. 33 total schools play on artificial grass within our home state. There are also currently 27 artificial turf Football fields in our neighboring state of Wyoming; 26 of which are High School stadiums. There are THIRTY (30) college Football programs in our region (Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, North Dakota, & South Dakota). With the recent announcements out of UM Western and Carroll College; ALL 30 of those College programs will now play on TURF beginning in the fall of 2024. Baker and Red Lodge are schools in the Eastern B Division that have recently installed an all-weather rubberized Track and artificial Football Field. Glendive, Lockwood, and Laurel are members of the Eastern A Division that have recently installed an all-weather Track and Football complex. In 2019, Sidney joined Glendive with their installation of a post-tensioned concrete track!

**Day 24 Tidbit** What is the longevity of an artificial turf Football Field? Laurel High School completed 14 seasons on their artificial playing surface before a recent “re-carpet”. Even at year 15, Fieldturf tested Laurel’s surface and deemed it meeting standards and safe for continued use. That was a surface with higher annual use than Glasgow’s. Laurel sits alongside a metro area in Montana and they sponsor Football and Boys and Girls Soccer as part of their school’s athletic offerings. Both Laurel’s re-carpet and Glasgow High School’s proposed surface are a step up in quality and technology from Laurel’s original surface. 15+ years is attainable while following the company’s recommended regular maintenance schedule. If our field is tested and approved for 20 years of use, we intend to operate for 20 years. The current cost of a re-carpet is only 10% of the cost of our proposed track and field bond project. Every re-carpet after the initial field cost will only further cost savings as there will be no need to address issues below the surface. Proper monetization on the sidelines of our proposed artificial turf and the scoreboard will allow us to annually earmark funds for a future re-carpet or rubberized track re-finish. This process may occur on average; every 15 to 20 years.

**Day 23 Tidbit** What are some long-term cost saving measures associated with artificial turf? -No more watering -No more fertilizer -No more mowing -No more painting lines -No more practice field maintenance. We CAN practice every day on the game field -No more need to employ additional summer maintenance staff for Football grounds

**Day 22 Tidbit** Is artificial turf a safe alternative to natural grass? Absolutely! In mainstream media, injuries are the hot-button topic recently associated with turf Football fields. No one will deny that a PERFECT natural grass surface is oftentimes the preference of players and coaches alike. However, we do not currently have an adequate natural grass surface in Glasgow and maintaining a new safe natural grass surface throughout the Rocky Mountain region or the Dakotas is far more difficult than maintaining a safe artificial playing surface. Professional Football teams (with Field and landscaping budgets that would exceed 1 million annually) still opt for artificial surfaces on half those 32 fields in the United States. The safety of artificial turf trumps any natural grass surface; when those surfaces have clear deficiencies (such as an uneven playing surface, a field with drainage issues, an area with poor soil content, late season dead grass associated with a field’s overuse, and rock hard playing surfaces associated with the cold weather of the north. High Schools, Universities, and small communities throughout our region are opting in-mass for this change not because PERFECT natural grass isn’t a clear safe option, but because sub-optimal natural grass surfaces often become OUR normal. For every “study” that is released about injuries related to artificial surfaces there is a comparable study released showing no correlation. 13 different studies on proven safety are linked here from Field Turf: https://fieldturf.com/en/why-fieldturf/proven-safety/ NFL data: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34982032/nfl-data-shows-recent-injury-rates-same-grass-artificial-turf 1,447 different studies were screened and 67 full reports were evaluated for these findings: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(23)00133-5/fulltext#:~:text=The%20overall%20incidence%20was%2014,injury%20incidence%20on%20artificial%20turf.

SCHOOL BOND FAQ’S by Angie Page Chairman, Glasgow School District Board of Trustees WHY NOW? In 2013, voters were asked to approve a facilities bond in the amount of $2,000,000. That bond called for the same Scottie track and field improvements that are being requested in this bond (AS WELL AS paving the High School parking lot, enclosing the commons area at GHS and installation of a turf softball field). That bond failed with 41% of 2,082 voters in favor of the project. Since that time, the Glasgow School District has kept this project in the pipeline, patiently waiting for a more opportune time (Keystone pipeline to gain approval) to again ask voters for their support. Unfortunately, Keystone didn’t happen and during the spring of 2022 it became obvious that the temporary fixes being made every year to the track and field complex were no longer viable. Small cracks in the running surface of the track had gotten huge. The 40-year-old track surface that was completed in 1981 had received two rubberized surfaces in 1990 and 2000 and the rubberized surface was failing throughout the track. Major drainage problems exist underground as the root cause of the facility issues. These problems will persist and continue damaging the track and field without major reconstruction. This involves demolition of the current field, installation of an engineered drainage system, installation of a new field surface as well as constructing a post-tensioned concrete track over the existing track surface to better accommodate expansion and contraction related to northeast Montana’s extreme climate. Costs for these renovations have quadrupled over the last 10 years. It was determined that unless the District acts now to save these facilities, it will likely become cost prohibitive in the future and the District will run the risk of having to further restrict use of, or possibly even close and condemn, the facilities and losing long-standing events that bring many people and money to Glasgow. In September 2022 the Scottie Recharged Committee began researching what it would require both in scope of work and financially to renovate the track and field. Concurrently, the Glasgow School Board was expressing their growing concern over the age and condition of much of the infrastructure within the school district. In February 2023 the board moved forward by approving a contract with McKinstry, who then utilized Cushing Terrell staff, to conduct a comprehensive field inspection of the Glasgow school buildings and associated grounds. This involved an initial 2-day site visit involving a project manager, structural engineer, mechanical engineer and roofing specialist. They evaluated the already leaking GMS roof as well as the GHS roof and began an exterior and interior wall crack investigation, also at GHS. Their team also studied the aging boilers at GHS that have been operating erratically and providing a great amount of frustration for the administration and custodial staff. While awaiting the complete facilities report from McKinstry, in March 2023 one of the boilers at GHS experienced a catastrophic failure. This project needed to be addressed immediately to ensure replacement of the boiler was complete by October 2023. The McKinstry facility reports were returned to the board and reviewed at a meeting on April 26, 2023. Sections of the middle school roof needed immediate replacement to prevent further interior damage to the building. Other large sections of the middle school roof were poorly installed over 15 years ago and are failing at the seams. The GHS roof is leaking into the underlying insulation, has entrained moisture throughout the roof system and should be budgeted for replacement as soon as possible. The boilers at GHS were also reported as being dangerously close to failure, which we already recognized. After the report from McKinstry, the board moved forward and approved hiring McKinstry, who then subcontracted with Dale Plumbing and Heating, to replace the GHS boiler. Funding for the boiler replacement and emergency repairs to the Middle School roof were approved at a special meeting on May 1, 2023. These maintenance projects were paid for through a combination of a 10-year Intercap loan and monies from the District’s building and multi-district funds. The school board then faced the question of how to move forward with prioritizing and funding the remaining projects for the safety of our students: necessary replacement of large portions of two of our school roofs and the long deferred renovations to our outdoor high school facilities were put at the top of the list. After consideration of these projects during the months of May, June and July the board of trustees moved forward with a bond levy request to fund repayment of the boiler loan, replacing sections of the GHS and GMS roofs and replacement of the GHS track and field with synthetic surfaces on August 8, 2023. HOW ARE SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN MONTANA FUNDED? Funding for school districts is provided by a combination of federal, state and local taxes. Each funding source has many laws that govern how the money can be spent. Most of the money received from the federal and state governments goes into the General Fund, which is primarily used toward salaries and benefits (85% in Glasgow) and provide for students’ education. Taxes from local taxpayers are collected through a series of levies, including General Fund, Building Reserve, Transportation, Tuition, Technology, etc. Local levies are used to bridge the gap between state funding and what it actually costs to operate a school district. When Glasgow passed the levy request in May 2023 the district was fully funded to the maximum budget authority that the state allows for the 23-24 school year. But as with the money collected from taxes, there are restrictions on how schools can spend the money from levies. Expenses for small building maintenance projects can be pulled from the general fund, but the state caps the General Fund to an amount based on enrollment. Neither the federal government nor the state provides any funds for the construction or maintenance of school buildings and facilities, so this funding must be provided through building reserve levies and bonds. It is unfortunate that in Montana the burden for funding public schools, both education and facilities, falls on the taxpayer. WHY HAVEN’T YOU SAVED MONEY TO USE FOR BUILDING MAINTENANCE LIKE WE DO IN OUR FAMILY? By law, a district cannot carry over more than $10,000 or 10% of the upcoming school year adopted budget of the general fund (whichever is greater). Reserve limits have also been established for some of the other budgeted funds. No law forces a district to spend what is budgeted and raised through the various revenue sources. However, the amount carried over from one fiscal year to another must offset local non-voted revenue, and the amount of fund balance that may be reappropriated is limited to 15% of the ensuing year’s maximum general fund budget. Any excess over the limit must be reverted to the state. The Glasgow School District budget is already used in its entirety to operate the district as it exists today, without adding any major renovation or construction expenses. WHY CAN’T YOU FUNDRAISE FOR THE MONEY INSTEAD OF RUNNING A BOND? The Scottie Field Recharged committee began fundraising in January 2023 to help offset the costs of needed renovations to the track and field. The fundraising was largely met with skepticism as citizens were reticent to give to a publicly funded institution that was already collecting their tax dollars. The committee could attempt to fundraise to cover the $5 million to renovate the track and field, but that would result in needing to find 3,500 people willing to donate $1,428.57 each to see this project come to life. Any funds that have been or will be donated will be used to offset the amount of the bonds to lessen the burden on taxpayers. Grant opportunities for the track and field were also researched. Many of these grants automatically disqualify public institutions and were unavailable to the Committee due to the Scottie Field complex being part of the Glasgow School District. WHAT ROLE HAS THE SCOTTIE BOOSTER CLUB PLAYED? The Scottie Booster Club has financially supported the work of the Scottie Recharged Committee. The Booster Club paid A&E Design for the initial design work for the track and field. They covered the costs related to the geotechnical survey of Scottie Field as well as expenses related to the mailer that residents will be receiving. They generously, and without question, provided this support to help complete the necessary preliminary work to obtain the costs related to the renovation project. The Glasgow School District has not used any District money in support of this project. At no time was the Scottie Booster Club asked to collect donations on behalf of the project nor did they volunteer to do so. WHAT IS THE BENEFIT TO ME IF I DON’T HAVE ANY CHILDREN IN SCHOOL OR IF MY CHILD DOESN’T USE THE FACILITIES BEING RENOVATED? Education is the foundation of a healthy community. The Glasgow School District is committed to developing the full potential of our students, building skills for lifelong learning and developing positive growth and confidence. Roof repairs to two of the District’s older buildings will ensure that learning will not be disrupted by roof system failures, leaks or further damage to our facilities. Repairs to the track and field will ensure that the Scottie track and field will be available for use not only by students, but also by all the citizens of Glasgow, surrounding communities and the larger area of Northeast Montana. It is the hope of the District that improvements to our aging outdoor facilities will not only encourage participation in physical education classes as well as extra-curricular activities, helping to develop each of our students as a whole person: academically, socially and physically, but also encourage potential newcomers to move to a community that supports the complete education of our students. WHAT ABOUT THE INCREASE IN TAXABLE VALUE OF MY HOME FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA? 2023 is a revaluation year with the state of Montana and many taxpayers have received notice in an increase of their home’s taxable value. Even if the taxable values for homes go up, everyone’s taxes for bonds would still be about the same because mills would go down. For bond levies and mill levies, if the taxable values go up for homes due to revaluations (and the changes are proportionate) then mills go down so the net change is $0. With new construction (or changes to property tax law that move the tax burden from residential to other classes like utilities, pipelines, or railroads) then mills go down and taxes go down. This is because new construction makes the tax base pie larger and everyone benefits. Usually over the term of a bond issue taxes go down over time because new properties are added with new construction which makes everyone’s taxes for the bond go down. WHAT IS THE BOND MONEY GOING TOWARD? CAN THE DISTRICT USE THE MONEY FOR ANYTHING ELSE? The breakdown of the bond request is as follows: Repayment of a loan to fund replacement of the failed GHS boiler: $560,000 Replacement of certain sections of the GMS and GHS roofs: $3,079,039 Replacement of GHS track & field with synthetic surfaces & amenities: $5,000,000 The money will be used only and exactly for the items described on the ballot. The money cannot go into the general fund or be used for anything not specifically stated on the ballot. The ballot language also outlines how the money can be borrowed and legally the District cannot deviate from the bond language. If money remains after the listed projects are completed, the District will use those funds to have the traffic patterns in front of Irle School professionally evaluated and possibly move forward with a solution because this project was also included in the bond language. WHY ARTIFICIAL TURF AND NOT NATURAL GRASS? Many studies exist and can be found on the internet in support of both artificial turf and natural grass playing surfaces. Extensive research has also been done regarding student safety on each of these surfaces with these reports also available on the internet. This debate will continue to go on. The determination to replace the existing surface with turf was based on facts relevant to our situation in Glasgow. The consistency in a turf surface no matter the weather or time of year will allow for safer participation in events and classes for our students. The climate in northeast Montana makes it very difficult to maintain a healthy, consistent, dependable grass surface throughout the growing season and beyond. A turf field would allow for predictable, safe use much earlier in the spring and much later in the fall. Water is a problem with the clay soil that exists on the field site. When irrigation is necessary the water issues are compounded. Turf would eliminate the need to irrigate effectively eliminating this obstacle. The District currently maintains two grass surfaces, one for practice and one for games. Both require continuous maintenance with irrigation, mowing, fertilizer, weed control and aeration. The playing field also requires game preparation resulting in custodial staff using hours of their time each week during the months of August, September, October and often into November. These costs add up to great expense for the District. Although the cost of the turf surface will be a greater cost than grass in the beginning, the savings the District will experience over time will result in the turf paying for itself in 10 years. The life expectancy in modern turf will allow the District to use this surface for up to 20 years and generate income from advertising to pay for the planned-for recarpet as it reaches its life expectancy.

**Day 21 Tidbit** What are some of our current issues with the Football playing surface at Scottie Field? The Football playing surface was first “crowned” in 1976 when construction began on the Scottie Field complex making it 47 years old. By the mid-1990’s Scottie Field began to show severe leveling issues, with dips and valley’s littered throughout its playing surface. It features multiple “crowns” and does not currently function as a safe playing surface for players, coaches, and officials. It is by any measure, one of the worst game fields in the state. Underneath the surface needs to be completely revamped. Regardless of a shift to an artificial surface or a return to natural grass, we would need to start over from ground zero and address the underlying issues. Many of our issues currently plaguing Scottie Field (Football playing surface and the heaving of the Track) are related to an ineffective drainage system. We are dealing with sloping, a deterioration/breakdown of all materials associated with our hydration system, and the unforgiving climate that is the Northeastern Montana tundra. All of the above is compounded by our current field location and its poor soil content.

**Day 20 Tidbit** Was the Glasgow High School roof recently repaired? No. Glasgow High School has had ZERO roof repairs since 2011. That particular repair was a small patch job for $46,492. The High School was built in 1969. The first small roof repair occurred in 1987 at the cost of $50,460. In 1993, there was a gym roof repair in the amount of $7,260. The biggest roof repair in the district occurred in 2002 at GHS, with two repairs totaling $272,292. (this is a different section than what is currently needing repaired) In 2009, there were two separate small repairs for a total of $75,640.

The Glasgow School District is at risk of having to cut more bus routes due to the bus driver shortage. In the past three years, the District has gone from nine route drivers, down to just four regular drivers. This mirrors the nationwide bus driver shortage. Starting September 18th, the Saint Marie will be down to one very full route, driven by the Transportation Coordinator/Mechanic. Strategies employed this year to recruit new bus drivers include the purchase of an “E” Bus, which is used on the Nashua/East route and doesn’t require a CDL licensed driver. A paraprofessional aide is currently driving this route in addition to her regular duties. Also, for this school year, driver wages were increased to $23.01 - $28.02 (depending on experience). The most recent strategy, a $1,500 sign-on bonus for new drivers, was approved by the Board of Trustees at their September school board meeting. Now would be the time for an individual to obtain their CDL license to drive bus, because effective January 1, 2024, new CDL applicants will be required to do an estimated 80-hour training course as a requirement before taking the CDL test. Glasgow School District will provide this training at no charge for new hires, and will also be available to the general public for a fee. Anyone interested in driving bus for the Glasgow School District is encouraged to call Justice Steele at (406) 263-7085 for more information.

**Day 19 Tidbit** Did the Glasgow Middle School receive a new roof recently? Is it still under warranty? No. The Glasgow Middle School roof has not had any MAJOR repairs in 40 years and there is NO current warranty in place to cover the area of the roof where all the repairs are needed. During the 1983 and 84 school years. $153,426 was spent during those 2 years of repairs. (The same year as the 2nd addition to the Middle School building). Small repairs were also made to the GMS roof in 1993 ($5,280), 1995 ($6,800), and 1996 ($8,561) for shingling. $118,110 in 2008 and 2009 school years and $36,995 in 2011 and 2012 school years for patching and repair.

**Day 18 Tidbit** Frances Mahon Deaconess Hospital has just announced an INCREDIBLE $250,000 donation towards our construction projects associated with the current proposed school bond. What does this mean? FMDH is committed to a $250,000 donation that is tied only to the passage of the bond. If the bond passes then the announced $250k goes immediately towards paying down the tax debt; therefore lowering the tax request for the bond. If the bond fails, the $250,000 would be returned to FMDH and is not available for any improvements to Glasgow Schools facilities. Combine this very generous $250,000 with our current $33,000 in donated funds and our current public tax request for these projects drops from 8.58 Million to 8.297 Million!

**Day 17 Tidbit** Glasgow Schools is offering a Public "Q&A" Session this evening. 5:15 PM in the GHS Cafeteria with our GSD Board of Trustees. Glasgow Schools and the Scottie Field Recharged Committee are committed to transparency and making sure the public has first hand knowledge of our failing facilities. This is the 4th "Community Session" since the Scottie Field Recharged project was announced. 1. Community Presentation and Q&A Session in the GHS Auditorium with Jared Petrino (Fieldturf) and Kris Koessl (A&E Design) - Thurs. Apr. 13th 2. Alive at 5 style. Free waterslides and kids carnival. Scottie Field Tours and Q&A sessions every 1/2 hour with AD Flaten - Wed. June 28th 3. Scottie Field and Boiler Tour + Q&A with 2 Board Chairmen and AD. Free game tickets for those in attendance. - Sat. Aug. 26th 4. Q&A Session with GSD Board of Trustees - Wed. Sept. 13th

**Day 16 Tidbit** What is the life expectancy of a post-tensioned concrete Track? Benyon sports reports a life expectancy that could exceed 50 years! Post-tensioned concrete tracks are now commonly referred to as "lifetime" tracks in the athletic complex industry. Introduced by the French in 1933, post-tensioned concrete has now been in use for over 90 years worldwide. It was introduced to United States construction in the 1950's. Bridges are currently being constructed with 100 year life expectancies, leaving those in Track construction with the belief that Tracks are also capable of lasting much longer than 50 years. (PTC) tracks are expected to last a minimum of 3 times longer than asphalt tracks. Scottie Field is currently a deteriorating asphalt track

** Day 15 Tidbit** Why is a post-tensioned Track beneficial? --Durability in poor soil conditions! The concrete slab actually floats and performs independently due to constant cable compression. --Resistance to cracking! The post-tensioned slab is kept in a constant state of compression, so it remains durable during weather fluctuations and extreme conditions (north east Montana) --Improves drainage! Reduces water holding areas and provides a consistent slope allowing for a highly competitive surface. --Makes use of existing sites! Reduces removal costs and potential unforeseen subgrade conditions.

**Day 14 Tidbit** What are some of our current issues with the Track at Scottie Field? 1. A 6 foot-wide sinkhole has developed in Lane 1 on the straightaway. This has caused us to remove lane 1 from competition recently when hosting Track Meets. Complete structural collapse is imminent due to our drainage issues associated with the Football field. It is now creeping into Lane 2 in the same area. 2. The west runway (Triple/Long Jump) is now experiencing sagging and is displaying signs of complete failure. 3. Nearly 50% of our track's rubberized surface is now loose or deteriorating to the point of no repair. The cracking and loose sheets of rubber is a safety hazard. 4. The southeast and northeast corners of our Track have large cracks that have developed over time. These cracks expand and contract depending on the temps and widen up to 4 inches at their peak. They are from the surface, though the asphalt underbelly, to the gravel base. The Southeast corner has developed its own sinkhole, due to this cracking, and it's affecting all 8 lanes during competition. 5. The East runway (Pole Vault) has experienced complete deterioration and is no longer viable. A portable runway has had to be used in order to limp this area along for competition.

**Day 13 Tidbit** What would an approved school bond cost me per month as a tax-paying citizen? $100,000 Home -- $4.88 If you own a home valued at this rate it would cost you the equivalent of 1.25 gallons of gasoline per month. $200,00 Home -- $9.75 If you own a home valued at this rate it would cost you the equivalent of 2 small-sized (12 to 16 oz.) Coffee's per month. $300,000 Home -- $14.63 If you own a home valued at this rate it would cost you the equivalent of one medium (single topping) pizza per month. Are you a landowner, business owner, or do not fall into any of the above categories? Please use this tax calculator to determine your EXACT tax impact for the upcoming school bond: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mKgyeRuorOhY1fsd19_3797rpVt57d9_yhXF3OdbiLQ/edit?usp=sharing

**Day 12 Tidbit** Who would pay for the majority of this school bond through their property taxes? This information is available to the general public. Over 45% of the yearly payment on this school bond would be paid for by the following Glasgow School District tax paying organizations/corporations (in order): * Northern Border Pipeline * BNSF Railway Company * Northwestern Energy- T&D * Northwestern Energy Corp. * Nemont Telephone Corp. * Montana Dakota Utilities - Gas Distribution * Montana Aviation Research Company * Cottonwood Inn Inc. * Norval Electric Cooperative Inc. * Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline

**Day 11 Tidbit** When was the last "activity-based" bond passed by Glasgow School District Voters? 25 years ago! On November 3rd, 1998 over 60% of 2,033 voters elected to support a school facilities bond that would largely see improvements to the school's athletic facilities. The bond was for $1.115 Million and included: -Construction of a brand new Weight Room -Construction of Handicapped Gymnasium Bathrooms -Replacing ALL the wooden bleachers in Scottie Gymnasium -Renovating Scottie Gymnasium Lockerroms from two to four to better accommodate tournament teams -New Lockers for ALL of GHS (locker rooms and main hallways) -Rubberized resurfacing of the Track at Scottie Field A project that surely highlights the crazy differences in cost inflation. What does this project cost today? This was very extensive and is similar to the project in front of our voters this fall.

Caring Hands will be paying for all student lunches every Thursday in September! Thank you, Caring Hands!

**Day 10 Tidbit** What would have the last "activity-based" bond paid for in 2013 and what is that cost difference today? In March of 2013; the Glasgow School District had the opportunity to pass a secondary facilities bond in the amount of $2 Million. That bond called for these same Scottie Field improvements. Including a NEW All-Weather Track, Artificial Football AND Softball Field. It also included full paving of the High School Parking Lot and the enclosure of the courtyard commons area at the front of GHS (surrounding the Scottie Dog statue). That bond 10 years ago failed with 41% out of the 2,082 voters voting in FAVOR of the project. Now in 2023; the amount is $5 Million for a NEW All-Weather Track, Artificial Football Field, and LED field lighting. (58% of current proposed bond) Due to the ever-rising cost of materials, labor, and equipment costs. (Overall inflation) This same project from 2013, not including a softball field, a paved parking lot, or an enclosed courtyard now comes with a price tag that is two and a half times higher. Punting these projects down the road will not save money and it becomes increasingly difficult to make it a reality. What does this cost become by 2025?

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A LEVY AND A BOND? The easiest way to think about it is that Levies are for Learning and Bonds are for Buildings. The following was provided by our friends at Glendive Public Schools: LEVIES = LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (Library Books, Curriculum, Staffing, Building Operation & Maintenance, and Needed Improvements, etc.) BONDS = BUILDINGS - MAJOR CONSTRUCTION (New Buildings, Major Renovations, etc.) LEVY– A ballot measure asking voters to agree to a property tax to collect a set dollar amount for a specific number of years. They are used for operational costs and capital improvements. Local levies bridge the gap between state funding and the true costs of operating a school district. There are many different types of levies. Some examples include: General Fund, Building Reserve, Transportation, Tuition, Technology, etc. REPLACEMENT LEVY– A levy asking voters to replace an existing levy that is scheduled to expire. BOND– It is like a mortgage for the schools, except instead of borrowing from a bank, the district finances the cost of long-term projects through the municipal bond market. When placed before voters, the school district is asking for the authority to sell bonds and then pay the principal and interest on those bonds using money collected from property taxes. Bond proceeds are used to purchase or construct new buildings, renovate and modernize existing buildings, add or upgrade infrastructure systems, and purchase additional equipment. Bonds are used to finance the projects because the payments to the investors are made over a period of 12-30 years thus spreading the costs of the projects over a long period of time which reduces the annual impact on property taxes.