When a school bond fails, voters are saying:

“Not this proposal, under these terms, at this time.” They are not saying: “This district may never ask again.”

School bonds are requests for permission to issue debt for a specific project or set of projects. When voters say no, the district simply doesn’t get that authorization, but the underlying need (buildings, repairs, safety upgrades) doesn’t disappear.

In the case of the 2025 bond request, the margin was very narrow and May elections typically have a lower turnout than in November. Ideally, a voting result would reflect a broader cross-section of the population — different ages, income levels, political views, and life situations. That legitimacy helps our community move forward instead of staying stuck in conflict.

In addition, there was confusion about the impact of the overlap between the 2006 bond not being paid off until 2026 and the 2025 bond requests starting concurrently. More information was needed to adequately explain the status of the retiring bond and the dire need for a new bond.

The school district heard that message loud and clear, and are trying to provide the information that voters need early in this process. The fact that so many people are already asking questions and paying attention is huge because it is a symptom of a genuinely invested community. 

The last major bond voters approved in 2006 funded renovations and additions across the district. The bonds were issued, the money was loaned, and the majority of the work was completed between 2007 – 2009. The money was then paid back over the next  20 years. That bond will be fully paid off once property taxes are collected in November 2026.

The 2006 bond was used to replace more than 300,000 square feet of roofing that engineers determined were beyond their expected useful life.

The 2006 bond also remodeled and converted the former Danielson’s Thriftway site into the Gladstone Center for Children & Families in 2009.

In addition, there were renovations and expansions at Kraxberger Middle School and Gladstone High School, as well as the addition of classroom space and much needed updates at JWE.

A detailed breakdown can be found here: https://www.gladstone.k12.or.us/page/2006-bond-information

The last round of repairs were done between 2006-2009. School buildings have flat roofs that last about 20 years, so the roofing completed during the 2006 bond process is now reaching the end of its useful life and would cost about $10 million to replace and/or repair.

Additionally, HVAC and other critical school infrastructure is now well past life expectancy, and experiencing system failures that require short term fixes.

When the district had our school buildings evaluated by engineers as part of our Long Range Facilities Report, the total amount of repairs would total 100 million dollars.  The school district is hoping that the community will support a bond for far less than that to do the bare minimum of repairs needed to keep the schools safe and functional.

That’s up to the community, which is why this is a voting matter- but in Oregon, our main school funding formula (the State School Fund) is designated only for salaries, instruction, transportation, and daily operations.

It is NOT designed to replace roofs or rebuild /refurbish aging schools. So when you see districts repeatedly asking for bonds, it’s usually because buildings age, construction costs rise, enrollment changes, and because state funding doesn’t cover capital expenditures. Basically, it is normal and common to see bond measures pass on a regular basis.

Examples:

• NCSD has a 10 yr rolling bond structure that passes reliably each time.

• Oregon City also has a strong record of getting their bonds approved.
  

There are a few key outcomes here:

1. The school buildings’ needs would remain unmet unless another funding plan is passed later. In fact, those needs only become more extensive and expensive.

2. Taxpayers would not see the new bond tax added. Because the current bond that goes through 2027 will expire once it is paid off, the tax rate would drop after that.

3. The district loses out on state matching funds: right now, the matching amount is 10 million, but only if the bond passes.

4. The district will likely have to be absorbed into another district. Based on proximity, this would be Oregon City or North Clackamas. Both of these districts have existing bonds and/or a local option levy that our residents will then start paying into.

1. We don’t know, because we lose local control of the schools. That decision would be up to NCSD or OCSD.

Additionally, we become a much smaller chorus of voices in a much larger room, and we lose the 3 school system that is a huge part of what makes living here so special to many residents.

2. Both of those districts currently have bonds we would expect to start paying into. None of those bonds have the Gladstone repairs factored in, which leaves the possibility that those districts, who have a more reliable history of voting YES on bonds, would pass an additional bond that we would have to pay into anyway.

That amount would be distributed amongst a much larger pool of school district residents, which helps alleviate the cost, but that amount would also include the existing bond those residents pay for. It seems very unlikely that a NO vote will ultimately reduce the amount we pay. 

3. They could simply opt to not repair the schools and instead close ours, moving all of our children to other schools in their district.

No. The land sale is something that needs to be started now in order to pay off PERS debt that must be collected by July 2027. That debt is currently 1.5 million. The sale of the land is nowhere near what we would need to pay for the repairs. At this point, we need to sell the land AND pass the bond.

The school board has reviewed, and will continue to review, variables while seeking community input. That said, placing 12 yr olds in a school with 18 yr olds is far from a viable solution, and the GCCF building has been an incredible asset to our community.

Not only would this outcome likely deter families from moving here, but it would also fail to generate enough revenue for necessary repairs and would not provide a long-term solution.

Yes. While the bond rate will be fixed at $x per $1,000 of assessed value, the amount you pay may vary over time. This is due to changes in your assessed property value and the interest rates at the time the bonds are sold.

The rate stays the same, but your yearly cost may adjust slightly as the assessed value of your home increases over time (typically around 3% every year).

If the measure is approved by voters, the sale of bonds would occur shortly after the election.

While interest rates are higher right now, the district has the ability to refinance the bonds later when the market is more favorable, just like how you might refinance a home loan. In fact, the district refinanced the 2006 bond and saved taxpayers over $2 million by securing a lower interest rate.

Transparency is a top priority. If a bond passes, a citizen-led oversight committee will be formed.

This group - made up of community members and district staff - will meet regularly to monitor progress and ensure funds are used as promised. Community members will be encouraged to volunteer.