After voters rejected a 2019 bond proposal, Michigan’s Dearborn Public Schools may consider a possible $500 million, $1 billion or $1.5 billion bond measure this year.
They all would involve a tax increase, said David Mustonen, communications director for the school district.
Led by Interim Superintendent Lamis Srour, the school board Feb. 12 plans to narrow the options to one or two. “Once we get that feedback, hopefully the board will then be able to make a decision on a definitive plan that we could put on the ballot in November,” he said. “That’s kind of the goal.”
Spring 2027 is also a possibility, because “there’s a lot of moving parts,” he said.
The district had $74.5 million of outstanding general obligation limited tax bonds as of Dec. 23, according to a .
It enrolls about 20,000 students.
The lesson the district learned from its 2019 bond defeat is that people want a 30-year, comprehensive plan showing how the debt would improve the district, Mustonen said. “That is exactly what we’ve done.”
That bond proposal fell short by 300 votes, and “we had 600 staff members who live in the city who did not vote, so there is a lesson,” he said.
The district was also caught off guard by a last-minute “no” campaign by “a group of successful business professionals” who had earlier promised not to oppose the bond, he said. And while that bond would not have raised taxes, the businesspeople turned the vote into a referendum on tax rates in the city.
At a Jan. 5 study session, the Dearborn school board heard analysis from Byrum & Fisk Advocacy Communications, which conducted public opinion research, and Quinn Evans, which conducted a district-wide building assessment.
Byrum & Fisk partner and CEO Mark Fisk told board members that “there is a real tension you’re going to have to reckon with as you assemble this proposal, which is the financial squeeze that residents are feeling in Dearborn, especially the younger residents.”
There is openness to a bond proposal, he said, but Byrum & Fisk — which did stakeholder interviews, focus groups and polling for the board — found most residents polled said they preferred a smaller tax increase, with the district able to return to voters later for the rest of its capital projects.
“The biggest divide was on property taxes and the reluctance to pay more, and this is really an age gap,” Fisk said. “This is something different that we’re seeing in the research. There was a time when it was actually the older voters who were much more pessimistic, much more resistant… That has changed, really since COVID, over the last five, six years.”
Another challenge is that most voters view building conditions across the district as generally good, according to the firm.
Respondents viewed building modernization and HVAC upgrades as “no-brainers,” Fisk said, but also wanted to see “something with a little more pizzazz.” Dearborn residents’ top three priorities are infrastructure, career tech and skilled trades, and HVAC repairs, he said.
About 61% of respondents said they’d support a bond measure, while 34% opposed it. But among supporters, 71% picked the lowest funding option or refused all funding options.
The Quinn Evans assessmentidentified four schools as “critical priority” sites.
“Ideas and trends have changed, and maybe people were saying, we don’t want to piecemeal it… but maybe they didn’t realize that a big plan is $1.5 billion,” Mustonen said. “That’s going to be a little bit of a difficult thing for the public to understand… And a 30-year plan means we’re going to try to touch all the buildings as soon as we can, but some schools are going to get updated 10, 15 years down the road.”
If the district is to put a proposal on the November ballot, the board will have to approve the official ballot language no later than late May or early June, Mustonen said.
