116 3rd St SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
Home / News / Education / K-12 Education
New survey: Cedar Rapids voters indicate support for creating new school facility plan, possible bond
Survey finds 2023 bond too costly while voters lacked trust in district

May. 13, 2024 6:30 pm, Updated: May. 14, 2024 8:00 am
CEDAR RAPIDS — Although voters said “no” last fall to a $220 million bond referendum that would fund improvements to Cedar Rapids schools, residents indicated support for the district creating a new plan and exploring another vote, according to newly released survey results.
More than 9,000 residents — about 15 percent of those receiving the survey — gave the Cedar Rapids Community School District a “good forecast” on how voters would lean in future bond proposals, said district Director of Operations Chad Schumacher in an interview last week with The Gazette.
The survey was scheduled to be presented Monday night to the school board.
The survey results are one data point that district officials are using to begin creating a new plan to address facility needs and support academic programs that will engage students to gain career experience or college credit before they graduate high school.
The new facility plan could be presented in spring 2025 — with input from a task force — with a bond referendum taken to district voters in November 2025.
Community interest in a new facility plan
Sixty-eight percent of survey respondents advised the district to create a new facility plan and explore another bond referendum. Eleven percent said to do nothing at this time and 21 percent said they were undecided and needed more information.
Fifty-three percent responded in favor of the district “right-sizing,” which could include:
- Closing buildings to reduce operating costs and eliminate maintenance expenses.
- Consolidating operations to improve efficiency and provide more opportunities for students.
- And renovating or building new schools to create more modern and supportive learning environments.
Another 33 percent of people said they were not sure about a long-range plan to “right-size” the district and needed more information. Fourteen percent said they would not support a plan to “right-size” the district.
The survey was conducted by School Perceptions, a research firm the district is working with that has experience helping more than 900 school districts navigate strategic and bond referendum planning. The survey was distributed in early April to about 59,000 active voters within the Cedar Rapids district boundaries and to school staff. People had until April 22 to respond.
The survey is one of several measures the district is taking to engage the community as it pursues a new facility plan to turn aging buildings into modern learning environments.
About 35 percent of people who responded to the survey were over 65 years old. Sixteen percent were between 55 and 64, 19 percent were between 45 and 54 and 20 percent were between 35 and 44. About 10 percent were between 18 and 34.
Schumacher said the age of people responding mirrors voter turnout in the November 2023 school election. About 35 percent of people responding have children in the Cedar Rapids district. About 5 percent of people responding do not live within the district, which Schumacher said is likely tied to staff members who live out of the district’s attendance boundary. About 12 percent of the survey respondents are school staff.
Why the $220M bond vote failed
Of respondents who voted on the $220 million school bond referendum in November 2023, about 41 percent said they voted in favor and 59 percent said they voted against. About 21 percent of people who responded said they did not vote on the bond.
This data mirrors election results. About 38 percent of voters in the district were in favor — far short of the 60 percent needed to pass it. There was an almost 24 percent voter turnout for the school and city elections in Linn County, with some voters turning out to vote only on the Cedar Rapids school bond referendum.
According to the survey, the primary reasons people voted “no” were:
- It was too expensive and the tax impact was too large — about 71 percent;
- They lacked trust in the district’s planning process — 64 percent;
- They were against closing and demolishing Harrison Elementary School, which was not a part of the proposed bond referendum — 42 percent;
- Installing turf at the high school fields — 39 percent;
- Building a new middle school on the north side of the Cedar Rapids district — 37 percent;
- They lacked information regarding what was being proposed — 35 percent.
“People voted ‘no’ because they didn’t trust us or there was a lack of clarity — all those themes we’ve been hearing, but they would be willing to vote for something if we can present something that they feel is reasonable as far as cost goes and a good plan they can trust,” Schumacher said.
School officials say a bond may be necessary to improve facilities because projects are too expensive to pay for in the district’s annual budget, even with funding from the Physical Plant & Equipment Levy — or PPEL, an existing capital projects fund used for the purchase and improvement of grounds, construction and remodeling of buildings and major equipment purchases, including technology.
More than 70 percent of schools in the district were built before 1970. On average, Cedar Rapids school buildings are over 68 years old, and major systems such as heating, ventilation, electrical, plumbing, roofs and windows are failing, officials say. Updates also are needed to address disability access to classrooms and restrooms.
College and career learning
Expanding college and career education has been a focus of Cedar Rapids school leaders for the last year — and is part of the district’s strategic plan — to better prepare students for high-wage, high-skill and in-demand careers after high school. But that would require the infrastructure to house these programs.
The district is preparing to launch freshman academies at Jefferson, Kennedy and Washington high schools for the 2025-26 school year. An academy has a college and career theme and prepares students for postsecondary options and careers. The following year, the district will launch academies for sophomores, juniors and seniors.
About 79 percent of the survey respondents said they would support expanding college and career classes. Eight percent said they would not support these programs and 13 percent said they weren’t sure.
Respondents were able to choose what career pathways the district should expand. The top pick was construction trades, with 75 percent of respondents. Among others:
- Health sciences such as medicine, emergency medical services and nursing — 66 percent;
- Computer and data science like cybersecurity --- 61 percent;
- Automotive services — 59 percent;
- Metals, fabrication and welding — 58 percent;
- Agriculture, food sciences and natural resources — 55 percent;
- Energy such as wind, solar, electricity and electronics — 52 percent;
- Engineering — 52 percent;
- Information technology — 49 percent.
Extending a capital projects levy in September
The survey also asked if voters would support renewing PPEL. The levy, which expires in 2025, must be renewed by voters every 10 years. The ballot question could appear in September. If approved, an extension would not raise the existing PPEL tax rate. However, it still wouldn’t create enough revenue for the district to build new schools, Schumacher said, though it is important for maintaining buildings.
About 45 percent of people who are parents and residents in the district said they would “definitely” vote yes on PPEL. About 28 percent of parents said they would “probably” vote yes. Forty-six percent of people who are staff and residents in the district said “definitely yes,” and another 29 percent said “probably yes.” Of people who are not parents or staff in the district, 36 percent said they would vote yes, and 31 percent said they would probably vote yes.
The measure needs a majority of votes to pass. Only 8 percent of respondents said they would “probably” or “definitely” not support renewing PPEL.
“This makes me really happy. I don’t want to take our foot off the pedal and think we’ve got it in the bag, but it gives ms a lot of hope that in September we’ll be able to renew a non-tax increase levy with a large margin,” Schumacher said.
“I really think that this shows the community support for our schools,” he said. “We had 60 percent of people vote ‘no’ on the last bond that took this survey and would support PPEL.”
Harrison Elementary School
Another question asked is what advice respondents would give about Harrison Elementary School.
Last year, the school board voted to close the school and combine attendance zones with Madison Elementary School, with a new school built on the Harrison site in northwest Cedar Rapids by fall 2025. Since then, the decision — which was mired in controversy from the start — has been put on hold.
About 21 percent said to replace Harrison with a new school on the same site, 1310 11th St. NW. Thirty-five percent said to renovate and expand Harrison, and 22 percent said they would support either option.
Write-in responses
People who responded to the survey also were able to submit written comments. The district received more than 9,000 of these — every one of which was read, Schumacher said. The comments also were entered into an artificial intelligence analysis tool “because we have biases, and we really wanted to make sure everyone’s voice was heard,” Schumacher said.
Schumacher and other district leaders have been on a “listening tour” this spring with “big elephant ears,” he said. They have met one-on-one with more than 50 community members from businesses, faith groups, nonprofits and neighborhood associations. They also have held about a dozen meetings with community groups.
Presenting the survey results Monday begins moving the district from the listening process into a more active facility planning phase, Schumacher said.
In August, the district will convene a task force of community members, families and staff to help guide facility planning. The district is looking for about 80 members to meet once a month.
Comments: (319) 398-8411; grace.king@thegazette.com