Support local school levies, bonds
Published 4:16 pm Friday, February 5, 2016
Even when the Legislature adopts a plan that satisfies the state Superme Court’s McCleary mandate and ends the reliance on local school levies, local voters will still be asked to approve levies and bonds that cover costs outside of teacher salaries and other parts of basic education.
As the state shoulders responsibility for the salaries and benefits of teachers and other district employees it should mean a reduction in the local school levies that voters approve. And it should create a system that moves away from the funding inequities among school districts, particularly between districts with sharply different property tax bases.
But we’re still a year or more away from such a plan. Both House and Senate have adopted bills that would gather data from school districts and establish a task force to study the issue and develop a plan and reforms, but among other differences, each body sets a different deadline. The House wants a resolution by the end of the 2017 legislative session. The Senate extends the deadline to 2018.
Which leaves most districts having to continue to supplement what they receive in state funding with levies for operations, technology, maintenance and some capital needs. Depending on the district, levies can account for between 24 percent and 28 percent of a district’s revenue.
Which is why many Snohomish County residents are being asked to get ballots in by Tuesday for school district levy or bond elections. Briefly, levies typically are multi-year property tax requests that fund education programs, incuding a portion of teacher salaries; curriculum and materials; athletic and extracurricular activities; facility maintenance; technology; transportation and other expenses. Bonds allow districts to fund major construction of school facilities, levying a tax rate over a 20- to 25-year period that pays back the bonds.
School districts seeking levy or bonds in Tuesday’s election include:
Arlington School District seeks approval of a four-year $56.9 million levy that, beginning in 2017, would collect about $3.56 per $1,000 of assessed property value. It’s replacing an expiring levy that this year collects $3.58 per $1,000.
Edmonds School Disrtrict seeks a four-year technology and capital improvements levy that would collect between 56 cents and 59 cents per $1,000, raising $59 million in total, $32.4 million for computers, infrastructure improvments and other technology programs and $26.2 million for capital facility upgrades, including roof repair and water system upgrades.
Lakewood School District seeks two separate levies. Its four-year replacement programs and operations levy would raise $26.2 million with rates ranging from $3.18 to $3.22 per $1,000. A new four-year $2.85 million technology and capital levy would result in a rate increase of 34 cents to 35 cents per $1,000, providing funds for IT infrastructure and support, building safety and maintenance and roof repair.
Mukilteo School District seeks a six-year $20 million capital projects levy for building maintenance, playground and technology improvements. Rates would vary from 25 cents per $1,000 in 2017 to 15 cents in 2022. This replaces an existing levy that expires this year with a 27 cent rate.
Stanwood-Camano School District seeks a four-year $51.4 million maintenance and operations levy with a rate of $2.28 per $1,000. It replaces a levy that in 2015, collected $2.27 per $1,000.
Lake Stevens School District seeks a $116 million 20-year bond that would fund construction of a new elementary school and early learning center and expand buildings at Lake Stevens High School, among other improvements. Its rate would be $1.21 per $1,000.
Sultan School District seeks a $47.77 million 25-year bond to expand and modernize Sultan High School and Sultan Middle School, make improvements at two elementary schools and build an educational support center. Its rate would be $2.13 per $1,000.
In all cases, the school districts have sought out and considered their community’s comments and ideas regarding the levies or bonds.
While a more equitable plan is worked out by state officials, school district voters should continue to put their support behind spending that provides good education opportunities in their neighborhood schools.
