Addressing Today’s Needs, Planning for Tomorrow
– A Plan Built with Community and Staff Input
Embedded Files
On November 3, 2026, voters will consider a bond proposal focused on renovating the 1966 portion of the elementary school and addressing key facility and site needs.
Why have we returned to voters?
Why have we returned to voters?
The district is returning to voters on November 3rd because the facility needs, and their impact on current students, have not changed following the August election.
Students only get one elementary school experience. Each year of delay means another year students learn with aging systems, accessibility limitations, and educational spaces designed for previous generations. It is also another year the district pays to operate and maintain spaces it no longer utilizes while future renovation costs continue to increase.
Following the August election, the School Board reviewed the proposal and its funding structure and reduced the amount requested from taxpayers while maintaining the core elementary renovation.
What has changed since the August election?
What has changed since the August election?
The core plan remains largely the same; the funding plan changed
Answers to questions you might have about what has changed [ click to view ] ⬇
Answers to questions you might have about what has changed [ click to view ] ⬇
Why is the bond request $2.2 million lower?
The borrowing request declined from $19.3 million to $17.1 million. Demolition of the unused elementary-school sections and playground improvements are no longer financed through the bond. The district plans to pay for that work separately using district funds. The broader facility plan therefore remains similar, but the amount financed by taxpayers is lower.Why is the district contributing its own funds now?
When the August proposal was developed, the district had not yet finalized a new agreement to continue its Highpoint Virtual Academy partnership, so future revenue was too uncertain to responsibly include in the project funding plan. Since then, a new agreement has been reached, giving the district greater - though not guaranteed - clarity about future revenue. This allows the district to plan to set aside funds over the next few years for demolition and playground improvements, reducing the amount that needs to be borrowed.Why is the maximum bond term 25 years instead of 30?
The November proposal would be outstanding for no more than 25 years, compared with 30 years in August. The lower amount and revised financing plan allow the repayment period to end five years sooner. A shorter term can reduce total interest payments.Why can't the district fund the entire project?
The district's annual budget is around $9 million annually. The district's operating budget exists to educate and support students every day. It pays for teachers and staff, educational programs, transportation, utilities, maintenance, and other daily needs. Michigan does not provide school districts with a regular, guaranteed source of state funding for major school infrastructure. Although the district can and does use some existing resources for individual projects, paying for a $17.1 million renovation from the operating budget would require redirecting substantial funding away from the people, programs, and services students currently rely on.
Ballot question for November 3, 2026 [ click to view ] ⬇
Ballot question for November 3, 2026 [ click to view ] ⬇
Shall Mesick Consolidated Schools, Wexford and Manistee Counties, Michigan, borrow the sum of not to exceed Seventeen Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($17,100,000) and issue its general obligation unlimited tax bonds therefor, in one or more series, for the purpose of:
remodeling, furnishing and refurnishing, and equipping and re-equipping school buildings, primarily the 1966 portion of the elementary building, which will include roof replacements, HVAC improvements, and the creation of a secure entryway; demolishing unused building sites; and developing, equipping, and improving playgrounds and sites?
Planned Improvements
Planned Improvements
The proposal focuses on the following facility and site improvements to the 1966 portion of the Floyd M. Jewett Elementary School.
– A plan that continues a long-standing school presence along M-115 –
– A plan that relocates drop-off/pick-up to the back of the building –
Project Scope
Project Scope
Safety & Accessibility
Safety & Accessibility
New secure entrance with visitor check-in
ADA upgrades, including the building entrance and restrooms
Classroom & Interior Improvements
Classroom & Interior Improvements
Updated classroom elements, including doors, ceilings, lighting, windows, and casework
New flooring in classrooms and office areas
New furnishings and equipment
Student & Staff Spaces
Student & Staff Spaces
New main office located in back at new secure entrance
New cafeteria that can also be used as a flexible learning space
New kitchen
Building Systems & Infrastructure
Building Systems & Infrastructure
New roof
Updated HVAC system and controls
New fire alarm system
Site & Outdoor Improvements
Site & Outdoor Improvements
Updated driveway and relocated drop-off/pick-up areas to back of the building
Relocated and updated playground (not referendum funded)
Removal of unused building areas (not referendum funded)
Conceptual Floor and Site Plans
Conceptual Floor and Site Plans
🔎 CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
🔎 CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE
Responsible Investment + Student Experience
Responsible Investment + Student Experience
The goal of the proposal is to take care of what Mesick already has, improve the environment students use every day, and create a right-sized facility the district can reasonably operate and maintain for the next generation.
Right-Sized Plan for Mesick
Right-Sized Plan for Mesick
Focuses on current facility needs that directly support Mesick students and the community
Reduces the building size by nearly half, removing the need to maintain unused space
Reflects community and staff input, to include keeping two separate school buildings
Safe, Healthy, and Functional
Safe, Healthy, and Functional
Updates ventilation systems, lighting, ADA accessibility, and classrooms to current standards
Improves safety with a secure entrance and better traffic flow for drop-off and pick-up
Modifies space originally designed as a high school to better serve current elementary students
Community Investment
Community Investment
Provides a practical local investment to maintain and protect school facilities we have built over time
Resets the millage to 3.4-mills, similar to 2015 level, well below 4.8-mills requested in 2018
Manages long-term costs by reducing building size, improving efficiency, and replacing outdated systems
Maintenance Commitment
Maintenance Commitment
Community members and staff have shared concerns about the care and upkeep of school assets and protecting taxpayers’ investment in them.
Those concerns helped shape a proposal designed with long-term stewardship in mind—renovating and updating existing elementary spaces, reducing the amount of building space to be maintained, and replacing aging systems.
Why have facility needs accumulated at the elementary school?
Why have facility needs accumulated at the elementary school?
Between 2017 and 2018, voters considered three bond proposals:
$14.5 million in May 2017
$12.8 million in May 2018
$13.7 million in November 2018
Each proposal would have moved elementary students to the junior/senior high school to create one K–12 campus.
When the proposals did not pass, the elementary school remained open and in use. However, its long-term future was still uncertain while the district considered its next steps.
During this time, the district focused its limited resources on extending the life of the systems in the elementary school rather than making major updates. Over the years, its systems continued to age and its needs grew. The district did not believe it would be responsible to invest significant taxpayer money in a building that might not be part of its long-term plans.
This history helps explain the situation, and the district understands that it remains responsible for improving routine maintenance and for taking good care of the community’s schools.
What is the district doing to improve maintenance and protect the community’s investment?
What is the district doing to improve maintenance and protect the community’s investment?
The district recognizes community concerns about how its facilities have been maintained and has recently taken several steps to improve maintenance and accountability. The district is:
Currently hiring an additional full-time custodian
Using a new digital maintenance tracking system to document, prioritize, assign, and track facility issues
Developing preventative-maintenance schedules
Adding biweekly building walkthroughs with maintenance staff and the superintendent, along with monthly maintenance reviews
Committed to quarterly evaluations and School Board reviews of progress
These steps are intended to identify and address problems earlier, improve follow-through, and better protect the community's investment.
Did You Know?💡
Did You Know?💡
The elementary building would be reduced by nearly half—from about 81,678 to 46,000 square feet.
Currently, only about 47% of the building is used for instruction.
The 1966 building was selected as the most cost-effective option and already includes key spaces, like a gym, reducing the need for new construction.
Updated HVAC systems are expected to improve efficiency by about 25%.
Energy use is projected to decrease by around 20% with updated systems and a smaller building.
A smaller, more efficient building helps reduce operating costs and ongoing utility and maintenance needs over time.
Traffic on M-115 has increased by 20–25% over time, with about 6,000–6,500 vehicles per day currently.
The plan moves the main office and secure visitor entrance to the back of the building, keeping all school access safely separated from M-115 traffic.
A community-informed plan (community task force, staff and local surveys) focused on right-sized spaces, safe and functional learning environments, and a practical local investment in maintaining school facilities.
The Open House events will begin with a brief presentation at 6:30 PM, followed by a school tour and a Q&A opportunity.
Currently, Mesick Consolidated School District does not have any outstanding bond debt or a sinking fund for facility improvements.
There is no state funding for school infrastructure in Michigan.
Schools can use their existing funds to pay for building upgrades but that takes away money from the classroom and students. Facility improvements are largely left to the community.
The School Board worked to develop a proposal based on community input, identified facility needs, and financial considerations. A 15-member Community Task Force (in picture), made up of parents, staff, and community members, met six times to review building conditions data, district finances, and survey results, and to tour school facilities before developing a recommendation for the school board.
The district also gathered input through community surveys and public meetings. Together, this process helped shape a proposal that reflects local priorities and the needs of Mesick students, staff, and community.
How Did We Arrive at the Plan
How Did We Arrive at the Plan
A look at the steps, input, and planning that led to the November 2026 bond referendum
A look at the steps, input, and planning that led to the November 2026 bond referendum
September 2025
⬇
September 2025
⬇
Comprehensive Facilities Assessment conducted by SitelogIQ, the district's facility planning partner, to assess physical, educational, and functional needs
First all-community meeting to introduce facility planning to the community
October 2025
⬇
October 2025
⬇
Facility Assessment review is presented to the School Board and district administration
Second all-community meeting – Facility Assessment review is presented to the community
November 2025
⬇
November 2025
⬇
First community-wide survey is taken by 206 residents – results presented to the School Board
Community Task Force process begins, 15 residents meet 6 times to review school finances, facility assessments, survey results, and tour buildings
Facility planning website launched to keep community informed of the process, including survey results and task force meetings
January 2026
⬇
January 2026
⬇
Task Force makes a facility recommendation to the School Board
District staff participates in a facility workshopping session
February 2026
⬇
February 2026
⬇
Second community-wide survey was taken by 352 residents – results presented to the School Board
Third all-community meeting – community-wide survey results and Task Force recommendation presented to the community
School Board has a comprehensive review including prioritizations, project scenarios, and potential costs
School Board begins the workshopping process
March - April 2026
⬇
March - April 2026
⬇
School Board has multiple workshopping sessions
School Board unanimously approves a resolution to place a bond proposal on the August 4th ballot
Page updated
Report abuse