Roaring Fork Schools Ask Voters For Tax Hike To Pay Teachers

Glenwood Springs —The Roaring Fork School District will ask voters to approve a new tax measure in November.

Superintendent Mark Feinsinger announced the move in a column published by the Post Independent. The district recommends the Board of Education place a Mill Levy Override (MLO) on the ballot. The goal is to offset a drop in state funding and boost teacher salaries.

The Board meets on August 26 to decide if the measure goes before voters. Feinsinger says nearly a year of work by an exploratory committee led to this recommendation. The district argues that investing in staff is the only way to keep good teachers from leaving for higher-paying districts.

Feinsinger leans on survey data to justify the ask. He cites a 2025-26 Family Survey where 92% of families responded favorably to student effort and achievement expectations. He notes that staff perceptions of instructional support are now higher than state averages. He calls these numbers "significant celebrations."

Read that again. 92% of families are happy with the status quo. Yet the district is asking for more money because it says "too many of our students are not meeting grade-level expectations." The column admits persistent disparities in academic growth remain. It does not say how many students are failing to meet grade level, nor does it specify which subject areas or demographics drive those disparities. It just says "too many."

The district lists three focus areas for the 2026-27 school year. First, implement a five-year strategic plan to strengthen student outcomes. Second, improve instructional quality and cognitive engagement for every student, every day. Third, invest dollars wisely to ensure students and communities thrive. The MLO is the funding mechanism for all three.

Feinsinger argues that teacher quality is the most important school-based factor in student success. He cites decades of research to back that claim. Families, he notes, identified "dedicated and caring teachers" as the top factor making their child’s school a great place to learn. The logic is straightforward: pay teachers more, keep them longer, improve retention, and student outcomes follow.

What the column doesn’t say is how much the tax increase will cost a local homeowner per year. It doesn’t break down how many new teachers or staff positions the MLO would fund. It doesn’t explain what happens if voters say no and state funding continues to shrink. The exploratory committee did a year of work, but the public gets a summary, not a line-item budget.

The district is betting that its residents will trust the "belief" narrative. Feinsinger writes that when educators believe together, they set higher expectations and persist through challenges. He frames the MLO as a vote of confidence in that belief.

For neighbors in Aspen, Glenwood Springs, and Carbondale, this is a direct hit to property taxes. The state funding decrease Feinsinger cites is a fact, but the remedy is a local tax hike. The district says it has higher staff morale than state averages, yet still needs more money to retain talent. That tension is the core of the argument.

The Board’s decision on August 26 will determine if this measure reaches the ballot. If it does, voters have until November to decide whether they believe in the district’s promise or its track record. The column ends on a high note about teacher quality, but it leaves the cost of that quality entirely up to the taxpayer.