Montrose County School District 2025 Post-Election Survey

Magellan Strategies is pleased to present the topline results of a survey of 1,380 registered voters within the Montrose County School District. The interviews were conducted from April 22nd – May 11th, 2025.

Magellan Strategies conducted a post-election voter opinion survey for the Montrose County School District to understand voter attitudes toward the District and assess why Ballot Issue 5A, a $198 million bond measure to fund construction of a new Montrose High School, was rejected by voters in November 2024. Opinions of the District were modestly favorable, with 55% holding a favorable view compared to 33% unfavorable, and 51% approving of the District’s job educating students compared to 36% who disapproved. Voter perceptions of the District’s financial health and stewardship were more divided, with 52% believing the District had adequate financial resources to provide a quality education and 42% agreeing the District was fiscally responsible, while 39% disagreed with that characterization.

Among voters who disagreed that the District spent taxpayer money wisely, the most common concerns centered on a perceived top-heavy administration that consumed resources before they reached classrooms, the sense that the $198 million bond proposal was far too lavish compared to what comparable schools cost elsewhere, and a belief that rising per-pupil spending had not translated into improved academic outcomes. Respondents also cited concerns about funds being directed toward non-core programs and facilities rather than teacher pay, special education, and core instruction. A recurring theme was a lack of transparency in district budgeting and a pattern of returning to voters for additional tax increases without demonstrating responsible stewardship of prior funding.

Voter awareness of Ballot Issue 5A was high, with 92% indicating they had read or heard at least some information about the measure prior to voting. After reviewing the full ballot language, 24% of survey respondents recalled voting yes and approving the measure, while 70% recalled voting no and rejecting it — results consistent with the actual election outcome. Supporters of 5A cited the aging and unsafe condition of the existing high school, the need for modern educational spaces to attract quality teachers and support student learning, community growth that had created overcrowding, and the argument that building new was ultimately cheaper than continued repairs to an aging facility.

Opponents of 5A cited the unacceptable cost and property tax burden as the dominant reason for their no vote, particularly in the context of recent property tax reassessments that had already increased household expenses. Many voters described the proposed design as extravagant and laden with unnecessary features such as climbing walls, glass atriums, and observation decks that they felt were inappropriate given the scale of the tax increase being requested. Concerns about poor fiscal transparency, the absence of competitive bidding, and a ballot clause allowing property taxes to be levied without limit on the mill rate further eroded voter confidence in the District’s stewardship of bond funds.

The survey tested two potential persuasion messages to assess whether additional context could have moved no voters toward approval. When told that the property tax increase would amount to approximately $9 per month for each $100,000 in home value, only 28% said they would have been more likely to vote yes, while 72% said it would have made no difference. When informed that the $198 million proposal was actually cheaper than remodeling the existing school, 36% said they would have been more likely to support it, while 64% said it would have made no difference, suggesting the cost framing argument had somewhat more persuasive potential but still faced an uphill battle.

Despite the bond’s defeat, 63% of respondents believed that a new Montrose High School was needed, compared to 28% who did not. When presented with renderings of the proposed school, 54% indicated they liked the plan but felt the cost was either appropriate or too high, with 40% specifically saying they liked the plan but considered the cost too high. Among identified challenges at the current high school, safety and security rated as most important at 94%, followed closely by infrastructure concerns at 93% and site logistics at 92%, with educational adequacy also rated as very or somewhat important by 89% of respondents. On the question of location, 32% preferred rebuilding at the existing site, 21% preferred a different site, 20% preferred a combined campus serving both Montrose and Olathe, and 27% said a new high school was not needed at all.

In their final open-ended comments, voters delivered a consistent message to the District: there was broad recognition that the existing high school needed to be replaced or significantly modernized, but the $198 million proposal was widely seen as too expensive and too elaborate. Respondents urged the District to trim non-essential design elements, pursue a phased construction approach, diversify the funding mix beyond property taxes by exploring sales taxes, grants, and other revenue sources, and demonstrate greater fiscal transparency and community engagement before returning to voters with another bond measure. The data suggested that a future bond measure with a reduced scope, a lower price point, a more diversified funding strategy, and a more robust public trust-building campaign would have a substantially better chance of winning voter approval.