Box Elder School District leaders outlined a phased 15‑year facilities plan at a recent board discussion, proposing a roughly $90 million first phase that would move ninth grade into the two high schools, build a North‑End elementary school, add classrooms and a gym at Discovery, and reduce the district’s portable buildings.

District staff and board members presented the plan as an alternative after a previously proposed $220 million bond failed. The leadership team described the $90 million first phase as about 40 percent of the failed bond and said it would be funded through a truth‑in‑taxation measure, capital reserves and the sale of surplus property rather than a single large bond.

The plan’s stated goals are to reduce overcrowding at elementary schools, shrink middle‑school cohort sizes by reconfiguring grade bands (creating four smaller 6‑8 middle schools), address unreinforced‑masonry concerns in older buildings and expand Career and Technical Education (CTE) and classroom capacity. District presenters said phase 1 targets both north and south enrollment pressures by adding an estimated 8–10 classrooms (plus a gym) at Discovery and building a new elementary on a Tremonton‑area site the district said has now become viable for construction.

Leaders said not addressing facilities in one package lengthens the timeline and increases lifetime debt: with no lump sum bond, financing would resemble a long‑term lease revenue or mortgage structure and could extend payments into the 2050s for projects completed in the 2030s. Presenters cited construction‑cost inflation of about 6–7 percent annually used by their architects and construction managers as the basis for caution about later phases.

Numbers explained by staff during the discussion included: a first‑phase financing need that would require roughly $7 million per year to service, a tax‑impact estimate of about $11 per month on a typical $450,000 home (staff called the figure an estimate dependent on assessed values and exemptions), and roughly $22 per month for an equivalently valued commercial property under the same assumptions. Board members and staff stressed those figures are preliminary and subject to change depending on assessed values, exemptions (senior/veteran abatements), appeals and final bond sizing.

The presentation said the district currently uses 36 portables; phase 1, as described, would eliminate 12 secondary‑level portables and 17 elementary‑level portables (29 total) and could remove additional units if Discovery is expanded. The district noted some portables (for example at Century) would likely remain after phase 1 based on current enrollment patterns.

Staff repeatedly emphasized tradeoffs: smaller middle schools (roughly 650–800 students each) versus rebuilding two large middle schools at 1,500–1,800 students (a configuration that had produced a higher price tag in earlier planning). They also flagged safety and instructional impacts tied to overcrowding in hallways and on buses and said moving ninth grade into the high schools would consolidate CTE funding (state CTE funding applies to grades 9–12) and enable more concurrent‑enrollment and AP pathways.

District presenters gave a tentative timeline that could allow some campuses to complete additions and move to a 6–12/9–12 configuration by August 2027, depending on approvals, contractor selection and financing. The board discussed using the 2029 expiration of a 2007 bond payment and the expiration of certain tax‑increment (RDA/TIF) payments as an opportunity to keep tax rates more stable: staff said about $3 million from the bond and $3 million from RDA would fall off in 2029, creating roughly a $6 million revenue swing that could offset a future financing burden.

Board members and staff also discussed impacts on specific schools. The presentation identified unreinforced‑masonry concerns at Bear River Middle, Box Elder Middle, North Park and Lakeview and noted other district buildings, including both high schools and Century, also contain older masonry elements. The presenters said a full retrofit program to address the district’s masonry inventory had previously been priced as part of a $220 million bond and would not be solved immediately under the smaller phased approach.

Next steps described at the meeting: staff will refine the plan with the facilities advisory committee and stakeholders, present architect and CM/GC contracting recommendations as agenda items for future approval, and circulate slides and supporting spreadsheets to board members. Staff also invited follow‑up meetings if the board requests additional review before formally directing bond or tax measures.

At the end of the discussion board members expressed differing priorities — some favoring a focus on elementary overcrowding and immediate remediation of portables, others prioritizing middle‑school safety and smaller cohort sizes — and agreed the phased plan is intended to be adjusted based on that feedback and the advisory committee’s work.