Michigan voters reject half of school bond requests. Blame the economy?

- Michigan voters approved fewer school bond requests this week than last May
- School bonds pay for school construction and infrastructure
- Voters in Democratic-leaning areas were more likely to approve requests
Michigan approved nearly $900 million in school bonds Tuesday, while rejecting half of the school bond proposals statewide.
Statewide, voters approved 22 of 45 requests, a success rate of 49%, below the 60% passage rate in the May 2024 election and the 62% passage rate in the November election, according to a Bridge Michigan analysis of Gongwer News Service election data.
“It’s a reflection of the uncertainty in the economy right now,” said Don Wotruba, executive director of the Michigan Association of School Boards, of Tuesday’s results.
He said some people are worried about increased costs or the impact of tariffs.
Statewide, voters rejected nearly $1.2 billion in school bonds out of about $2.1 billion requests.
There were significantly more bond proposals in Republican-leaning districts than Democratic-leaning districts in the Tuesday election. In Republican-leaning districts, 47% of bonds passed, compared to 57% in Democratic-leaning districts.
In recent years, school bonds passed at higher rates in Democratic-leaning areas, according to previous Bridge and Gongwer analysis.
Related:
- Plan to 'limit’ cellphones in schools passes Michigan Senate. Is it tough enough?
- ‘Gutted.’ Michigan losing $200M in fed research funding, with more in limbo
- ‘It’s devastating’: Michigan loses about $15M in federal AmeriCorps cuts
Public school districts can issue bonds to construct or remodel buildings or athletic facilities, buy buses, upgrade heating and cooling systems or invest in technology. By law, voters must approve the bonds.
Voters passed requests in two Democratic-leaning districts — Dexter Community Schools ($241.8 million) and Ferndale Public Schools ($114.8 million) — but rejected them in solidly Republican ones, including Midland Public Schools ($285 million) and St. Johns Public Schools ($99.75 million.)
In Midland, voters rejected the bond proposal in a 2-to-1 margin.
“They just basically threw everything up on the wall, instead of picking the most important things, they just put everything on the list,” said Doug Loose, a local resident and landlord.
Loose said he did not support how much of the borrowing would have been for items with short lifetimes or that the district would be making athletic upgrades when, from his point of view, games no longer draw community members who aren’t school parents.
Loose said the bond would have led to increased costs for landlords that would get passed down to renters.
Midland Public Schools Board of Education President Phil Rausch and Superintendent Penny Miller-Nelson said in a joint statement they were “disappointed” in the election results.
“While this campaign may be over, the challenges we have expressed over the past several months will remain until we find solutions,” the statement said.
“Over the next several weeks, we will review the results of this election and consider our options for moving forward as a school community.”
A downward shift
School bonds have had lower passage rates in recent years compared to 2018-2021. Experts have said the economy, complicated nature of school finance and shifting attitudes about public education since the pandemic may all be reasons for lower passage rates.
Voters in Democratic-leaning Marquette County rejected a $30.9 million school bond proposal, after rejecting similar proposals in 2023 and 2024.
“The needs have not gone away,” Gwinn Area Community Schools Superintendent Sara Croney told Bridge Wednesday. “We do need to listen to our community and understand what the issues are.”
She said voters believe their taxes will be raised more than they actually will be and that with the issue being the only thing on the ballot, the “no” voters had motivation to show up whereas those who support the schools may not have.
Croney said the district may need to spend money on mailed brochures to get the message out about school funding.
Ferndale Superintendent Camille Hibbler told Bridge some people had questions about how a 2020 bond differed from the 2025 proposal and others had questions about how a city proposal relates to the district bond proposal. Overall, she said she was “grateful and thankful” for the voters’ approval.
These funding proposals come in the wake of a recent report that said Michigan schools need $23 billion in the next decade for building repairs and upgrades. It also comes amid uncertainty on what federal funding will be for public schools across the country.
The Michigan Department of Education recently announced $75 million would be going to three school districts to reduce the number of school buildings used and perform building upgrades. In a news release, the department said there were 51 school districts requesting a total of $626 million for school consolidation and infrastructure efforts.
Michigan schools can also ask voters to approve sinking funds, which are paid for through millages. They can be used for some of the same items as bonds as well as school security and technology purposes. They are pay-as-you-go funds to cover the costs of projects as needed.
Voters approved 57% of sinking-fund increase requests and 100% of renewal requests in the Tuesday election.
Across the state, there were 99 school funding proposals including the 45 school bonds, 17 sinking-funds requests, 33 operating millage requests and four intermediate school district operating millage requests.
Michigan Education Watch
Michigan Education Watch is made possible by generous financial support from:
Subscribe to Michigan Education Watch
See what new members are saying about why they donated to Bridge Michigan:
- “In order for this information to be accurate and unbiased it must be underwritten by its readers, not by special interests.” - Larry S.
- “Not many other media sources report on the topics Bridge does.” - Susan B.
- “Your journalism is outstanding and rare these days.” - Mark S.
If you want to ensure the future of nonpartisan, nonprofit Michigan journalism, please become a member today. You, too, will be asked why you donated and maybe we'll feature your quote next time!