BELLE — An October survey of over 300 parents, students and staff members resulted in 73 percent voting in favor of projects proposed for a 2026 bond issue, including a potential multipurpose building. Participants were not required to support the bond or be eligible to vote to take the project survey.

Assistant Superintendent Dr. Staci Johnson opened the discussion on Monday about the data.

“Over 300 people took this short survey,” Johnson began. “73 percent of those who took the survey were in favor of a bond and were eligible voters. So that’s really good information to have right now. It seems that the community is fully in support, in terms of the specific projects. It’s pretty split across the board.”

Johnson said the survey asked about a multipurpose building, either attached or unattached at the high school.

“So we have talked about some options, and I think you have an option in front of you that we believe meets the most needs that have been pointed out by all of our surveys.”

According to the results, 79 students, 132 staff and 372 parents participated in the survey. In a disaggregated breakdown of participants, parental support for an attached multipurpose building had a 47.3 percent approval, at the stadium was 42.5 percent and 10.3 percent of those surveyed were not in favor of a building.

“Parents generally support investing in school facilities, but they want to ensure the bond projects are balanced, transparent and serve all students,” Johnson wrote in her report. “The strongest theme was the desire for meaningful support of the fine arts.”

Many parents expressed that band, choir, and theater programs need to clearly demonstrate that fine arts are valued equally to athletics. Parents also emphasized the need to address practice space if the small gym is re-purposed. They want clarity on how wrestling, cheer, PE and young sports programs will be supported so schedules are not negatively impacted, Johnson wrote.

Staff surveyed had a slightly different view, with 46.8 percent in favor of a multipurpose building at the stadium, 43.2 percent in favor of an attached multipurpose building, and 9.9 percent were not in favor of a building.

“Staff overwhelmingly expressed that any project added to the bond should benefit the largest number of students,” Johnson wrote in the survey breakdown. “Many staff support a multipurpose facility if it is large, flexible and accessible. However, there is a significant concern from the fine arts staff and supporters that the current proposals prioritize athletics over curricular arts programming and do not adequately address the longstanding need for a true performing arts space.”

Board member Jean Baker commented on the same concern during the board meeting. The former choir teacher expressed that turning the choir and band room into an athletic facility that would be located near the gym should result in a comparable or better facility for the arts.

“Of the options we’ve had, this is really good for the band and the choir,” Baker said. “I just want to reiterate again and again that if their space is being taken and re-utilized, what they get returned to them is equitable or even better than what they left, as far as size and equipment and accouterments in the room.”

Board member Kari Nolting believes the new space would meet those requirements. “This is better than what they currently have, because they’re not sharing a space,” Nolting said.

Baker said she realized that. She also expressed concerns about the seating.

“I have issues, concerns with the motorized seating in the performing arts area, that it will again become a space that, when the performing arts are using the space, someone else will come in and try to use that gym floor,” Baker said. “I just have a problem with that. It needs to be really a sacred space.”

Without disaggregating the data, 42 percent of those surveyed were in favor of an attached multipurpose building, 38.9 percent opted to build near the stadium, and 19.1 percent were not in favor at all.

Additional projects were identified and arranged by priority over the course of four long-range facility tours. Priority projects were identified by how often the item was mentioned and how high a priority it was assigned.

“By combining the two measures into a significance score, we can identify which projects are most important across the district, based on both frequency and urgency,” Johnson explained in her report.

The eight projects by priority and significance score are locker room renovation and expansion (67); gym renovation and upgrade (65); a band, choir, art and addition expansion (46); dedicated performing arts space (45); connection between ag and high school buildings (41); middle school football and multi-use field (39); general career, technology expansion (38); dedicated secondary athletic space (35); weight room relocation (35); and career, technology expansion for the auto technology class (35).

Parents and staff focus groups expressed a concern that there needs to be a simpler explanation of the difference between a bond versus a levy, and what happens if the bond does not pass. Superintendent Dr. Jeri Kay Hardy addressed the concern.

“The Gasconade County R-2 School District’s debt service levy has been at 67 cents per $100 of assessed valuation for about 19 years, since 2006,” Hardy said. “The operating levy has not been changed since then as well. We are the longest-running district in our area that has not seen an increase in the amount per $100 for debt service or operating levy for 19 years now. All other surrounding districts have had some type of increase in their levies.”

Hardy emphasized that when the district runs a bond issue, they are not asking for an increase.

“We’re asking for an extension,” she said. “That takes the current levy and it extends it out for more time. The question has been ‘what if you let this go?’ Well, the only other way to raise money is through — because there’s not enough money in capital for projects — so the only other way is through local donations. We’ve talked about these things. Then, you look at a lease purchase, and you’re paying more interest on a lease purchase.”