Revised $10.5 million Lolo school bond back on ballot

2014-01-06T06:15:00Z 2014-10-19T08:11:54Z Revised $10.5 million Lolo school bond back on ballot

Lolo School District is taking another swing at trying to pass a $10.5 million bond to build a new K-4 school.

Voters defeated the request last October by a 43-vote margin.

Disappointed by the outcome, the school board and its administrators regrouped after the election and hosted a series of community input sessions.

From those events, voters clarified their concerns, others explained their objections to the bond, many offered solutions, and in the end superintendent Mike Magone heard from the community that the issue should go to a vote yet again.

Ballots for the bond will be sent out Feb. 20 and voters have until March 12 to cast their decision.

Like last time, the bond will provide for a full K-4 school on a 20-acre parcel on Farm Lane, and include a gym, library and expanded food service.

But this time, because of community input, the site of the school will be farther east and a bit north on the property, Magone said.

The reason for the site adjustment is for the building to be closer to Farm Lane and therefore reduce some construction costs by reducing the distance to utility connections and for driveway builders.

“The new plan is also more sensitive to the folks who live on the south side of the 20 acres, and this way there is more space between the residents and school,” Magone said.

Despite the cost savings adjustments to the new plan, the bond requests remains

$10.5 million.

“Because the project has been delayed a year, we have inflationary costs to deal with,” Magone said. “Essentially, the savings we have had to come up with will be going towards the inflationary increases.”

The updated estimated tax impact of the new plan also means a slightly smaller burden on taxpayers than the previous bond request.

Prior bond issue estimated tax impact on $100,000 home was about $132/year; new bond issue estimated tax impact estimate is about $125/year. On a $200,000 home, prior bond issue impact was about $263/year and new bond issue impact would be about $251/year.

Even if voters defeat this second bond attempt, the district’s severe overcrowding issues and safety concerns related to being on a hill and so close to U.S. Highway 93 will remain, Magone said.

The district currently has 600-plus enrolled students who are crammed into a school that was last remodeled in the 1950s.

Not only is space an issue – and the district estimates another 100 students will enroll within the decade – the buildings are not wired for modern technology, nor are they adequate for special education needs.

Because of cramped quarters, staff, volunteers and students are working in storage closets due to lack of space. Students also have only 8 to 10 minutes of seat time in the cafeteria for lunch each day before they need to clear the way for other students who need to eat.

Magone is hopeful that the bond will pass this time around, especially given the fact that so many community members helped revise the plan and encouraged the district to take the issue to voters again.

“It was such a close vote, and we thought it was fair to put it out there again,” Magone said.

In October, 60 percent of all ballots mailed out were returned with a

867-824 vote.

“We really appreciate everyone’s input on this new plan,” Magone said. “And we hope to see as a good a turnout as the last election.”

Reporter Betsy Cohen can be reached at 523-5253 or at

Copyright 2015 All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(3) Comments

  1. daggone
    Report Abuse
    daggone - January 07, 2014 9:56 am
    You're disappointed by the outcome. Just run it again till it passes? WTH?
    Love the bond issue or hate it, this is not a wise way to run things.

    I suppose though that the folks who will be disappointed if it passes will get to run it till it fails huh. That's fair play.
  2. Lolo SD Supt
    Report Abuse
    Lolo SD Supt - January 06, 2014 5:29 pm
    Thanks for your comment. You are correct in that the full campus has had additions since the 50's. It's the lower building that was built in about 1905 and then added onto primarily in the 50's and 60's. That building currently serves the full 5th and 6th grade classes (130+ students and staff) and the 5-8 middle school office services.

    Should the bond request pass the Board will need to decide what happens to the lower building. They may use it for cold storage (saving on utility costs). If it were torn down, the Board has indicated strong interest in saving the bell tower for a historic purpose given the bulk of the rest of the original facility is quite worn out, patched and largely divided up/changed over the years.

    The inflationary cost for one year delay is based on a 3% per year inflationary cost to the whole project, quite in the reasonable range for inflationary estimates.

    Thank you again and please feel free to contact Lolo SD if you have any further questions. We appreciate your input!
  3. Yellowdog1
    Report Abuse
    Yellowdog1 - January 06, 2014 7:52 am
    I went to this school when it was just the one building next to highway 93. The article is incorrect in saying the last remodeled in the 50's is not correct. They were continually adding to the buildings when I was attending in the 70's, and know more has been added since.

    What is going to happen to the old school?

    Funny how in one year there is such a inflationary increase.
Missoulian Civil Dialogue Policy

Civil Dialogue Policy for Commenting on

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Comments can only be submitted by registered users. By posting comments on our site, you are agreeing to the following terms:

Commentary and photos submitted to the Missoulian ( may be published or distributed in print, electronically or other forms. Opinions expressed in's comments reflect the opinions of the author, and are not necessarily the opinions of the Missoulian or its parent company. See the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Our guidelines prohibit the solicitation of products or services, the impersonation of another site user, threatening or harassing postings and the use of vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language, defamatory or illegal material. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability or other classification. It's fine to criticize ideas, but ad hominem attacks on other site users are prohibited. Users who violate those standards may lose their privileges on

You may not post copyrighted material from another publication. (Link to it instead, using a headline or very brief excerpt.)

No short policy such as this can spell out all possible instances of material or behavior that we might deem to be a violation of our publishing standards, and we reserve the right to remove any material posted to the site.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick