By The Herald Editorial Board
Deadlines are fine things, particularly when consequences provide the incentive to get the work done.
In 2010, the Legislature set such a deadline for itself to resolve the state Supreme Court’s mandate to amply fund K-12 education and end the state’s over-reliance on local school levy dollars. It basically gave itself until the end of the current legislative session to resolve what’s known as the McCleary decision. The disincentive the deadline is tied to will roll back the maximum amount that school districts can receive from local property tax levies to a 24 percent lid from the current 28 percent lid allowed at the end of this school year.
The Legislature may yet get to a resolution this session that satisfies its obligations under McCleary, but there’s no certainty that will happen. Some of the doubt is fueled by a lack of a detailed education funding plan from Republicans. A joint committee was expected to present recommendations at the start of the session, but no report was presented. Instead, Democrats presented their proposals, and Republicans responded with a list of guidelines.
Meanwhile, school districts are approaching the “levy cliff,” the rollback of the levy lid that will reduce school district budgets, statewide, by more than $358 million, $250 million of it from levy revenue. Snohomish County school districts stand to see significant losses to school year budgets, forcing layoffs and other program cuts. The Edmonds School District could lose about $7 million for the 2017-18 school year and a total of $15 million through 2018. The Everett School District, likewise, stands to lose $3.3 million over the current school year and $10.3 million through 2018.
House Bill 1059, which would delay the rollback of the levy lid by a year — and ease districts away from the cliff — has already passed the House, 62-35, with 12 Republicans joining Democrats in approval.
Support in the Republican-controlled Senate, and a timely vote, is less certain.
Senate Majority Leader Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville, in a report Tuesday by The Herald’s Jerry Cornfield, said the House bill could work against the longer-term solution.
“While I can appreciate the House expressing its concern over the levy cliff, making a property tax extension outside of a broader K-12 solution may complicate finding a solution,” Schoesler said in a statement.
Schoesler’s concern is shared by at least one atypical bedfellow. During testimony before a House committee, a spokeswoman for the state’s largest teachers union, the Washington Education Association, supported the bill but said it should be included as part of the larger solution. Early action on the levy cliff bill, the WEA said, could delay a resolution to McCleary this session.
Some lawmakers might see a delay on the levy cliff’s consequences as easing pressure on the Legislature to get a fix in place this session. They shouldn’t, and it’s not likely the Supreme Court will grant lawmakers a deadline extension that easily.
Timely action on the levy cliff bill by the Senate is necessary, in the interests of the school districts and their students.
School districts will soon — if they haven’t already — begin budget preparations for the 2018-19 school year. Uncertainty over funding will require districts to prepare two budgets. And without a pushback from the cliff before this spring, when districts begin making staffing decisions for the next school year, they will be forced to notify teachers and other staff that they could be laid off, an action that does nothing to help schools retain good teachers.
Consequences provide needed incentive to stick to deadlines, but the levy cliff puts those consequences on school districts, teachers and students instead of the lawmakers responsible for meeting the deadline.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
