On Monday, the Mancos RE-6 school board saw mixed feedback from residents and division on board after recent talks of a conceptual affordable housing plan for the district. It then voted to halt discussion until after the November election.
This conceptual plan included housing units built by the district’s bus barn that could be rented by teachers, staff or parents of students who couldn’t afford housing in Mancos.
Some residents said they felt the board plan could jeopardize the proposed mill levy and bond in November and put the district in a “financially risky position.”
“You’re not in the business of real estate or investing money,” a woman identified as Teresa said. “The asset of your school is students … we should invest in what we need here, now. … You guys are here to teach the children.”
Another questioned why housing was a priority, in light of the “battle to pay teachers” and repairs needed on campus.
One teacher supported the need for affordable teacher housing, saying he was offered “a lot” more money for a job, but he chose the Mancos school district.
“I chose this place because I believe in y’all,” he said.
When he first came to Mancos, he said, he and his wife couldn’t find a place in their budget, at first. He thought they might need to commute from Cortez.
“You have to get teachers in the door,” he said. “Teacher housing will give us an advantage.”
Another staff member said the district needed to raise teacher and staff salaries.
“We’re asking for a salary increase, not houses we can’t afford,” she said.
After citizen comments, the board discussed their view on the proposed housing plan.
Rachel McWhirter said the board’s No. 1 one priority was staff pay, and the community and board should focus on the “uphill battle” in passing the bond.
Victor Figueroa echoed McWhirter, saying that competitive wages would help teachers afford housing.
“I’m very concerned … it may bring our school district to the brink of bankruptcy, in all honesty,” Figueroa said. “This is a risk I’m just not willing to take.”
Instead, he suggested the district focus on keeping facilities in good condition.
“I am not in support of a housing project that has left teachers and the community with more questions than answers,” Figueroa said. He said the plan was “financially reckless and irresponsible.”
Tim Hunter followed up, saying that if there weren’t staff who needed to rent the affordable housing units, then they could rent them out to people in the community.
“They’re not meant to be forever homes,” Hunter said. “They’re supposed to be a chance for people to make it in here.”
He added that the $350,000 couldn’t be allocated for teacher salaries if it wasn’t used for the housing project and a “yes” vote would be a “go ahead” for the district to continue “due diligence” on the project plan.
“The timing is crucial right now,” Hunter said. “This opportunity will never rise again. Even if it’s just a few staff members, it’s a benefit to our school district for a few staff members to have a place to live so they can teach our kids.”
Craig Benally said he thought the project was “very innovative” but that there were so many moving parts.
“Maybe they’ll stay because they have a roof,” he said, referencing future teachers. “If may be only one or two bedroom, but maybe that’s all we need.”
Business manager Chrissie Miller shared concerns about the budget, noting there were more expenditures than revenue. Miller also expressed that it may be best to wait until the district knows the result of the mill levy and bond questions, sharing that the district is down 21 students since January.
Because the state pays the district $13,000 per student, that is a loss of $273,000.
Superintendent Todd Cordrey favored the housing project plan, saying he wanted affordable housing options to be available to those who need them.
“I think it’ll work out. I feel very confident of that fact,” Cordrey said.
Board President Emily Hutcheson-Brown rounded out the board discussion on housing, voicing her favor for moving forward like Hunter and Cordrey. She reminded those listening, however, about the language of the vote and the fleeting nature of a grant.
“The vote will be ‘Should we move forward to continue to pursue,’ not vote to pay $350,000 (tonight),” Hutcheson-Brown said.
She added that the risk in waiting would be “evaporating” the chance the district could provide housing in the near future and the nearly half a million dollars in grant money that is being considered for the project.
Hutcheson-Brown expressed concern for teachers and staff who aren’t able to live in town, close to the school, because of the high cost of living.
“Our own superintendent is not living in our town limits,” she said.
Following other items, the board moved to action items where they voted on whether or not to move forward with the housing plan.
When it came time to vote, McWhirter moved to table the housing grant vote until after the district knew the results of the bond and mill levy election in November.
McWhirter said if the district still wants to move forward at that time, they could apply in the first quarter of 2026 when there would be a “larger amount of grant money to be awarded.”
McWhirter, Figueroa and Benally voted in favor of tabling discussions until after the November election, while Hutcheson-Brown and Hunter voted against.
With the majority vote, further discussions will be tabled.
The next board meeting is Monday, March 17 at 6 p.m.
