Saddle Mountain Unified: two board races, an override that grows, and a $66.5 million bond

November 3, 2026 general election. Saddle Mountain Unified School District No. 90 serves the Tonopah area west of Buckeye. The board candidates have almost no public record beyond the county's official list. The two measures are documented in the district's informational pamphlet, and one of them is unusual: Proposition 435 does not just renew the override, it increases it.

How these races work: three board seats are up in two separate races. For the single two-year seat: Keith Kronback and Daniel Blackson, both certified; vote for one. For the two four-year seats: Nicole Connot, Amy Amaral, and Emilie Myth, all certified; vote for up to two. Board service is unpaid. The county list does not mark incumbency, and the Arizona Republic's October 2, 2026 guide does not profile this district, so no biographies are claimed for any of the five.

Proposition 435: an override that increases from 10 to 15 percent

In one sentence: Saddle Mountain Unified may exceed its state operating budget limit by 15 percent, a continuation and an increase of its existing 10 percent override, raising an estimated $4,208,500 in the first year (fiscal 2027/28) at an estimated tax rate of $0.4122 per $100 of net assessed value.

Most override questions on this ballot are straight renewals. This one is both: it continues the override and raises it by half. At the same tax base, the current 10 percent override corresponds to roughly $2.8 million of budget (the arithmetic of 10/15 of the $4,208,500 figure), so a yes adds roughly $1.4 million a year of operating authority over the status quo, while a no leaves the existing 10 percent phasing down under its own schedule if it is not otherwise renewed.

Proposition 436: a $66.5 million bond

The companion question asks to issue $66,500,000 of general obligation school improvement bonds, repaid through the secondary property tax. The district's informational pamphlet (linked below) is the document of record for the project list and the district's estimated tax rate; no independent rate estimate was found in the sources we reviewed, so we do not print a household dollar figure for the bond rather than derive one silently.

The math for your household (Prop 435)

About $103 a year at the new 15 percent rate, on a home with $25,000 of net assessed value

The district's estimated rate of $0.4122 per $100 of net assessed value is about $103 a year on a home with $25,000 of net assessed value (roughly a $250,000 market value home at the 10 percent residential ratio). The increase portion alone, the jump from 10 to 15 percent, is roughly one third of that, about $34 a year on the same home. Higher-value properties pay proportionally more.

A YES vote (each question)

Prop 435: the operating override rises to 15 percent for seven years. Prop 436: the district may borrow up to $66.5 million for school improvements.

A NO vote (each question)

Prop 435: no increase; the existing 10 percent override continues its own phase-down path. Prop 436: no new borrowing.

The strongest case for YES

A growing rural district catching up. Supporters argue Saddle Mountain's 10 percent override is below the 15 percent standard most Arizona districts carry, and the Tonopah area's growth makes the lower rate a legacy of a smaller district that no longer exists.
Both asks are on one ballot. The district pairs operating and capital funding so voters can judge the whole financial picture at once rather than in fragments.

The strongest case for NO

It is an increase, whatever the label. Opponents note the word "continuation" in district materials sits next to a 50 percent larger override, and voters should weigh it as a tax increase of about $1.4 million a year, because that is what the arithmetic says.
$66.5 million is a lot for a small district. Per student, the bond is large by county standards; critics ask for the project list discipline that the pamphlet should demonstrate.

Verification notes

The $2.8 million status-quo figure is arithmetic from the district's own pamphlet total (10/15 of $4,208,500), labeled as arithmetic rather than a district-published number.
School board campaigns file finance reports with Maricopa County. No finance totals or campaign materials for the five board candidates were found in the sources we reviewed.
The per-student characterization of the bond in the case against is a comparison, not a district figure; the district's enrollment and project list are in the pamphlet linked below.

How to vote without getting your ballot rejected

Mail it by Tuesday, October 27, 2026. After that day, do not mail it: use a drop box or a vote center instead.
It must be received by 7 p.m. on Election Day, Tuesday, November 3. Postmarks do not count.
Sign and date the affidavit envelope, and write a current phone number on it.
Leaving any item blank is allowed. The two board races and the two measures are separate items; answer any, all, or none.

Sources

Certified candidates, Maricopa County School Superintendent: schoolsup.org (PDF)
District informational pamphlet (Props 435 and 436 figures): schoolsup.org (PDF)
Maricopa County School Superintendent, bond and override elections list: schoolsup.org