The Crane School District governing board has decided to request voters for the renewal of a $1.5 million District Additional Assistance (DAA) override that increases the district's annual budget. Crane has relied on a voter-approved DAA override the past seven years to increase its capital budget, which pertains to facilities, infrastructure and equipment.
According to Crane, extra funds from this override renewal would be used to support technology devices, equipment, software and infrastructure; transportation vehicles, buses and equipment; and school safety and security infrastructure.
When voters approve an override, they directly provide the extra funds, and that's why a special election's required. The revenue for the override is levied annually as a secondary property tax rate.
Arizona law permits districts to increase budgets for capital purposes by up to 10% of their revenue control limit, and depending on the amount the district is requesting, a tax rate is set to provide that amount each year.
Randie Stein, managing director for K-12 schools at Stifel Public Finance, presented on the current and potential override during the governing board's May meeting.
During the first year of the current override, Stein noted that the tax rate was set at $0.6361, and it's steadily decreased to $0.4789 now.
In the pamphlet voters will be seeing this year, the tax rate will also be listed as 48 cents, the same as the prior fiscal year.
“Now why this works this way–in fact, in Fiscal Year '27, it will not be $0.4789," Stein said. "But that is the number that would show up in the tax rate in the pamphlet because the calculation is based on the Fiscal '26 property value that we already know. When you actually get there and are implementing the DAA override for Fiscal '27, you’ll use the Fiscal '27 property value so there’s kind of a mismatch for the pamphlet purposes.”
The tax rate each year depends on assessed property values. Pulling from Fiscal Year 2026 property values, Stein identified the average value of a house in Crane's district boundaries as $182,070. This would mean that, at the current rate of $0.4789 per $1,000 of a property's assessed value, their annual secondary tax for the purposes of the override would come out to $87.
“This tax impact is approximately equal to the tax impact that your taxpayers are seeing now with the current DAA override," Stein said.
She had one major point to make for property owners in the district, however: these values are not the same as the ones they see on sites like Zillow.
“I have gone to the very scientific website of Zillow and just in the last couple weeks, pulled up what Zillow says each of these houses is valued at, which I think is what individuals – if you are thinking of seeking your house, you’re more likely to think ‘That’s what I could sell it for,’ and so in each of these cases, you could see that the Zillow value or what you would contemplate that you could sell it for is substantially higher than the value that the property is taxed at," Stein said. "...Hopefully that message penetrates among various communities and that when you're told the average value house in the area is $182,000, you’re not sitting there thinking to yourself, 'Yes, but my house is worth over $300,000 and so my tax bill is going to be 50, 75% more than that,' when in fact your tax value for tax purposes is in fact right at the average."
According to Stein, the phenomenon won't always exist, but it has for a while now because market values have escalated much more quickly than the Arizona constitution allows for limited property values to escalate.
"This is really quite common in a lot of parts of the state," she commented. "Again, ... the constitution says that limited value on an unchanged property can only grow 5% a year. So if market value grew 10% for 5 years, you wind up with a big gap and that’s just between the limited value and the assessor full cash. The assessor full cash, honestly by design, is at best 85% of market value, and I say by design because that helps the appeals process.
"You know, the assessor tells you got a full cash value of $217,000, and you’re thinking, 'I could sell that house for 250.' You’re thinking ‘I got away with something,’ but if the assessor told you it was 260 and you’re thinking, 'I can only sell it for 250,' you start talking to your neighbors and thinking about whether you should appeal – and that’s statewide. The Department of Revenue works with the county assessor to keep it even throughout the state."
When asked about the future of these potential tax rates, Stein opined that they'll come down.
"I do think Fiscal '27 is going to go down a couple pennies," she said. "Your property value is growing, you’re still talking about the same $1.5 million, and I think actually the tax rate will go down if in fact your voters reauthorized the DAA override starting in Fiscal '27.”
Paul Ulan, principal of Primary Consultants LLC, chimed in that "your slice gets smaller as more people pay in. So as your assessed value increases, your slice gets smaller."
Ulan presented next during that meeting to share the results of a community opinion survey on the possible DAA override renewal election. The survey was conducted from April 16 through April 18, 2025 by phone and recorded 381 responses from high efficacy voters. The margin of error for the survey is +/- 5%.
The results of the survey* are as follows:
*Note about presentation: the results for questions 9 and 10 were incorrectly presented. After confirming with both Primary Consultants LLC and Crane, the results for question 9 actually came out to 51% agree, 18% disagree, 31% no opinion. The results for question 10 actually came out to 77% agree, 6% disagree, 17% no opinion).
About 45% of respondents replied that they felt property taxes are too high while 41% said they were just about right. When asked about whether Crane was headed in the right direction, 47% agreed while 37% were unsure.
Ulan pointed out that 31% of respondents have never had kids, so it's probable that the majority of those respondents are reflected in those who said 'unsure.'
"Two things that stand out – we have three questions with 25% or more no opinion, so it’s not that you aren’t doing a good job, it's just people don’t know, don’t understand, aren’t paying attention to it," he said. "But you can see even using your money in a responsible manner, it’s a five to one ratio you’re at 50%, almost half, 40% no opinion. 'I don’t mind paying a few dollars more a month in school taxes as long as it makes education better for kids' – you’re at 76%. Prior years, we’ve been in the low 80s.
"But you know, those numbers aren’t bad. You’re meeting the needs of your students, again a much higher number. And then 'As a property owner, I believe quality schools will enhance my property values.' Again, pretty good number, but again a third, no opinion."
On the day of the survey, 64% of respondents said they would vote yes if an election to renew the override were held that day. While 14% said they would vote no, 19% were unsure and another 2% refused to provide a response.
When respondents were asked whether they'd approve an override that addressed more than the district's basic needs and would cost the average homeowner about $1.25 more a month, support dropped down a bit to 59% while 17% said no and 21% were unsure.
Support further dropped when the estimated added cost rose to $2.50 per month. About 45% said yes while 27% said no and 26% were unsure.
Primary Consultants then pointed out the following elements:
- All the funds will stay in the Crane District and be controlled by the Crane governing board.
- It's "basically the same amount as last year and only costs the average homeowner about 50 cents a year."
- Without the funds, it's likely some cuts will need to be made to pay for necessary safety improvements.
- Funding from the state for capital-related items is expected to be reduced in the coming fiscal year.
When asked how respondents would vote if an election were held that day knowing this additional information, 66% replied that they would approve an override. Another 13% said they wouldn't while 19% remained unsure.
During discussion, Governing Board President Marcos Moore expressed some concern about the possibility of a recession between now and November.
"I mean, there’s some forecasters that are saying that we’re running into a recession," he said. "...I don’t know if that’s how accurate it is; I think it’s possible. But things are starting to turn around, I think, and so if there’s a recession at the election, it’s going to be a rough sale, but I’m willing to give it a shot. That’s just me. I’m gonna vote for it, and I appreciate it that it’s a 1.5 (million).”
He added that a lot of what the override intends to cover should be paid for by the state in the first place, but he's in favor of asking to renew the override.
"Fifty cents a year," Board Member Dan Farar commented. "Not every month, not every whatever. That’s very, very reasonable. Now, here’s the other thing that I really like about this: we’re not asking for the full 10%. We’re conservative and we know that to this point, we have a great history of actually using these funds according to what we desire to, you know, what we need them for.
Crane CFO Dale Ponder affirmed Farar's point, noting that the district is required to share every year between Sept. 1 and Oct. 31 how override funds are being spent.
"That’s part of the transparency that we have within our community," Ponder said. "That’s statutorily driven, but we also include the same information within the popular annual financial report that we share with the community so they can see the progress that these funds are being used for.
"So we’re very much in the tune of, ‘Here’s what we said we were gonna do, and this is what we did.’ And that’s incredibly important to us and we how we spend the resources ”
Board Member Jim Colby added that he doesn't feel bad asking constituents for the override because he thinks Crane is overall doing "a pretty good job."
"Maybe we'll wake up one morning and find out we didn't, but I think people are fairly happy with the way our school district runs," he said.
Given that only 16% of the community survey respondents replied that they though Crane was on "the wrong track," Colby's opinion was validated at the meeting.
During her presentation, Randie Stein had also pointed out the history of support that Crane has seen. Voters passed bond initiatives in 2005, 2014 and 2023 as well as the DAA override in 2018 that's about to expire.
"We as a board have a responsibility to take care of our district, right? and I think this is a reasonable thing to ask for," Board Member Keli Osborn concluded. "And I appreciate all the work that’s been put into the polling and putting all this together. And I think, yeah, the recession factor is a potential concern, but I mean, I think there’s little harm in asking, and historically, our community has been really supportive."
The board members voted unanimously to call for a special district additional assistance override election in November. The deadline for submitting arguments for and against the election to Yuma County School Superintendent Tom Hurt is Aug. 8, 2025 at 5 p.m.
