What voters should know about the Feb. 11 Yelm schools levy election

District attempting to pass the measure on its third try

Posted

Yelm Community Schools is spending the final days ahead of its Tuesday, Feb. 11, special election answering community questions and sharing information regarding its educational programs and operations (EP&O) levy.

The district is asking voters, both in Thurston and Pierce counties, to approve a tax to help fill in the gap of funding not paid for by Washington state. Its last two attempts in 2024 failed, with the second election margin shrinking from the first. Just under 54% of voters across Thurston and Pierce counties voted against the levy during the Feb. 13, 2024, election. A subsequent levy in April with a lowered collection rate from $2.50 per $1,000 of assessed property value to $2.25 failed with 51.5% voting to oppose the levy across both counties.

As voters prepare to send in their ballots, here are some important bits of information to know with the election fast approaching.

To learn more about the levy, visit the district’s Q&A page at https://www.ycs.wednet.edu/our-district/levy-information.

What is an educational programs and operations (EP&O) levy?

Washington state funds about 78% of the YCS budget, but it leaves a number of key areas without full funding, which is where the EP&O levy comes into play. The district uses taxpayer dollars, as approved by voters, to fund an additional 14% of its budget, and the remaining 8% of the budget is funded by federal dollars and other local funds.

The 14% that the state doesn’t fully fund includes areas such as special education, districtwide staffing, rising operational costs, athletics, activities, health and safety, technology, materials and more.

Levies are only to be used for learning and operations, while bonds are for building. Funds from the district’s 2019 bond that helped rebuild Yelm Middle School and Southworth Elementary School cannot be used for learning and operations or any other areas that the levy is supposed to cover.

The four-year EP&O levy is not a new tax; it is a replacement tax of a prior authorized levy in 2020. The collection of the 2020 levy ended in December of 2024. If the levy passes on Feb. 11, the district would still not begin to collect funds until January of 2026, thus impacting the 2025-26 school year.

How the levy impacts taxpayers

Following the double failure of the EP&O levy last year, the Yelm school board voted in October to place the levy measure on the Feb. 11, 2025, special election ballot with a maximum collection rate of $2.50 per $1,000 of assessed property value. The levy request for this election cycle estimates a 3% growth in property value.

While the district states that the amount it collects will not exceed the $2.50 rate, it has historically collected lower than its projected rates each of the last three years, including $2.15 in 2024 and $2.02 in 2023 despite voters approving a $2.50 rate in 2020. The tax rate is based on three variables, including the total amount the district requests from levy dollars, property values and growth in the community.

The school district cannot collect more money than what voters approve. As the community grows, taxes are shared across the overall community and may even reduce the dollar per thousand of assessed property value.

If the levy is approved by voters next month, the district will collect the following amounts over the next four years:

2026 - $16,600,000

2027 - $17,100,000

2028 - $17,600,000

2029 - $18,125,000

To learn more about what the collection rate will cost taxpayers, visit the school district’s levy information page and click the estimated tax calculator under the levy authorization amount chart.

YCS Superintendent Chris Woods acknowledged that, while he understands the burden that taxpayers already have, the levy is the only way for the district to provide the best education and services possible for students.

“It’s not easy to go out to our voters and ask them to approve a levy when people are already feeling pinched with taxes. We saw property values go through the roof the last handful of years,” he said. “For us to depend on levy dollars to just operate as we have been operating is challenging.”

The state of public education funding in Washington

Article IX of the Washington state Constitution says that, “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.”

YCS officials said the word “ample” is far from the case in Washington’s public education funding model.

In 2012, a state Supreme Court case known as the McCleary decision ruled that the state was not meeting its constitutional duty to provide ample funding for basic education. The Supreme Court ordered in 2015 a $100,000 per day fine that was lifted when the state began to fully cover basic education funding in 2018.

The funding formula that lifted the fine was not without its side effects, however. One of the main reasons for the current funding gap is that the Legislature has not increased funding to reflect inflation and the rising costs of not only operations and materials but wages.

According to a chart from the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), insurance costs for school districts increased 85% from 2019-20 to 2023-24, costs for natural gas rose 63%, cleaning expenditures increased 48%, and utilities and electricity costs increased 34% and 33%, respectively.

The legislature also removed the state salary schedule, which meant that, while bargaining units could negotiate wages, districts had to compete with other districts in the area to attract and particularly retain staff. For districts with fewer students and schools, that’s more difficult to accomplish.

How the state funding model impacts YCS

Woods said the cost of staffing has increased “tremendously” since the removal of the state salary schedule, and the district must scramble to keep up.

“What has happened is now you’ve got larger districts like North Thurston and Olympia and Bethel and Franklin Pierce where they have more revenue and can pay more, and then there’s districts like us that are kind of the mid-sized district,” he said, adding the district has to remain competitive with neighboring districts in order to attract and retain staff. “We have to work really hard to keep up, and we can’t afford it. Then you’ve got Rainier, Rochester and Tenino who can’t keep up with us. It’s not about anybody saying these people don’t work hard and don’t deserve it. It’s about what we can afford as a district when 85% of our budget is people.”

Another side effect of the funding formula is that it is based on the needs of an “average school.” YCS believes that this idea for allocation of state money to schools doesn’t work because it doesn’t recognize the special needs and costs of individual school districts of varying sizes and circumstances around the state.

Woods said the funding system he calls “broken” has three other flaws, including special education, transportation, and materials, supplies and operating costs (MSOC). He, along with school board Vice President Casey Shaw, added that the state has continued to tack on mandates and additional positions but doesn’t provide additional funding for those.

“It’s going to take extra resources and extra money, and they don’t add extra money every time they add extra mandates. The mandates keep coming every single year,” Shaw said.

Woods said districts have told legislators they don’t want any more unfunded mandates, including special education and policy updates and the staffing and resources that are tied to those. Districts in financial distress have to cut from other areas to fund those mandates because they cannot cut from state-mandated areas.

Shaw, who added that he had always been an “anti-tax and anti-government type of fella,” called the state’s approach to education “overly authoritarian” regarding its curricula, mandates and regulations, and “clipping of school boards’ wings when it comes to making decisions for those in their district.” He said the government has “nefariously instituted the system to “make districts look heartless and irresponsible so they can shield the government from the anger of the people and keep us infighting amongst each other.”

“If everyone upset and broken over the current situation would focus their energy toward the state government, they may be forced to discuss the broken funding system,” Shaw said.

In 2022-23, local and basic education funds the district received subsidized the state’s basic education program for MSOC by $1.2 million, special education services by $4 million, substitutes for staff by $1 million, and certificated and classified staff by about $9 million. State fiscal data also shows that 43.95% of the state’s 2023-25 biennium budget is for public education, down from 49.74% from the 2017-19 biennium budget.

Salaries

The state funding model impacts teacher salaries and the amount of teachers and paraeducator allotted per district as part of its formula the district calls a “one-size-fits-some solution.”



“We’ve got a lot more teachers than the state plans for. I believe the state is using somewhere between $70,000 and $75,000 for the average salary based on their funding model, and the average salary is like $91,000 in our district,” Shaw said. “You’re immediately $16,000 behind on every single teaching position, and that doesn’t factor in the fact that we have more teachers than their model says we should.”

The levy helps pay for what the state doesn’t cover. Jennifer Carrougher, YCS chief of finance and operations, said the levy touches every staffer’s salary.

According to the new YCS collective bargaining agreement with Yelm Education Association, the salary range for YEA certificated staff is $61,131 and $117,430, for a median annual salary of $96,273.

According to a presentation from Carrougher, during the Aug. 15 school board study session, the state allocated 278.5 full-time teachers, but the district had 263.5. Although the number of teachers is lower, the cost is higher as the district pays $32.45 million compared with the state’s $29.28 million in allocated funding for a difference of $3.17 million.

The biggest difference is in paraeducators, as the state allocated 14.06 full-time employees compared with the district’s 29.6 paras. The state allocates $1.16 million compared with the district paying $2.28 million for a difference of about $1.11 million.

“We had a state salary schedule that all teachers across the state were paid the same, so it was based on years of experience and your education. Each year, the state would determine the cost of living increase of how much that salary schedule would raise,” Woods said. “They took that away and said to every district, ‘You’re on your own.’”

Impact of 2024 double levy failure on schools and district

With the failure of the levy measure, YCS reduced 100 staff positions as part of approximately $10 million in cuts. More than $5 million in additional cuts are expected to be made in the spring, Woods said.

The district cut transportation for athletics and eliminated high school and middle school C-team sports ahead of the 2024-25 school year. Local organizations, including Total Sports Development, helped raise money to save C-team sports. YCS also raised the price of athletic fees and facility usage.

The loss of levy funds resulted in: the reduction of social, emotional and mental health support; student activities and events; reduction of building budgets; larger class sizes; lower enrollment; limited professional development; and a limited hiring pool.

Districtwide, schools are seeing less small group instruction, tutoring, counseling and trained adults to support serious behaviors. At the elementary level, there are reduced enrichment opportunities, librarians were cut, and there is no fifth grade band. Middle school choir, yearbook and computer science classes were cut. At Yelm High School, college in the high school classes, career and technical education programming, and after-school activities were reduced. Teachers no longer have new employee orientation and have limited training opportunities, minimal coaching support and fewer mentoring options.

Woods said, through visiting schools and speaking with student leaders this school year, students are feeling the loss of opportunities that previous student bodies enjoyed.

“That may put them at a disadvantage when it comes to them going beyond high school,” he said. “On the other side of things, [they’ve lost] the joy and the experience of some of the things that they were able to have. We don’t have a drama club this year, and there was a pretty good-sized group of students that that was their joy. There are many examples that I heard from kids that they feel like they were not given the same opportunities as others. That was with us trying really hard to keep the cuts away from students as best we could, but when you’re cutting that much money, there’s just no way to keep the cuts entirely away from students.”

Potential impact of 2025 levy failure

As the district faced a budget shortfall entering the 2024-25 school year, it petitioned the OSPI to help balance its budget through minimal oversight and counsel.

If the levy fails, OSPI may take matters into its own hands to put the school district back on track. Carrougher said OSPI would be in charge of most, if not all, district decisions that are typically made by the school board, including hiring, purchasing and operations. She said that such situations are rare.

Woods added that if the levy fails next month, athletics, activities and anything outside of classroom instruction would likely be cut.

Shaw fears that the district will be caught in between what he called “no man’s land,” as it may either violate state law by cutting mandated areas or break collective bargaining agreements [CBA] as it attempts to, or OSPI attempts to, balance its budget.

“What does the state even do when they come in? Do they have the authority to sever a CBA? I don’t know,” Shaw said. “Do they come in and let you slide past some of these mandates? No way. What does that look like? I don’t think it’s physically possible.”

Shaw said that a no vote on the levy would bring more state control, not less.

“For those that continue to vote no because of your disgust with our state’s handling of funds and constant death by taxation, I share your frustration and anger. But know that a no vote on the levy does nothing to chink their armor while only harming our children and our community,” he said. “If we cannot balance the budget, which we can’t without levy funds, the state will be forced to come in and manage our district for us.”

Carrougher said that the school district would likely lose revenue in reduced enrollment due to a potential levy failure as families move or transfer districts.

Management of district funds

School officials have spent much of the winter speaking with and answering questions from voters and community members at forums hosted at every district school. They have also visited the Rotary Club of Yelm, Yelm Chamber of Commerce, Yelm Lions Club and Yelm Senior Center.

One of the common questions the district has encountered pertains to alleged mismanagement of district funds. Woods said the district has passed all of its audits from the state and that every dollar spent by the district is made public, either in board reports or via public records requests.

“There’s nothing that we can do or money we can spend without it being public and also without us having to follow rules because if we don’t, then our funding or our audits are in jeopardy,” Woods said. “If people really believe that schools are fully funded, then people will go to the conclusion that you don’t need levy dollars. Therefore, if you’re requiring levy dollars to operate your district and yet you’re fully funded, then you’re mismanaging your funds. I think that’s the connection people are making.

“Some people may make that assumption based on the fact that we cut $10 million last spring and we’re still operating. We are operating, and we’re doing the very best we can, but what we’re doing is not sustainable long term,” he continued. “Our staff are tired, and many people are wearing multiple hats to try to offset the cuts.”

Operation of Feb. 11 special election and voter turnout

Voters in Thurston County may have received a surprise in the mail last week as the ballot envelope came from Pierce County rather than Thurston County. This is because Pierce County will run the levy election for the district after signing an interlocal agreement with Thurston County, which is undergoing a remodel of its ballot processing center. YCS will save money by putting its levy measure on the Pierce County ballot, which includes an additional measure in some areas, instead of being the lone measure on the Thurston County ballot.

Voters can still drop off their ballots at ballot boxes in the YCS district or by mail, and Pierce County’s ballot processing machines will be utilized to tally the results. Drop boxes include Lackamas Elementary, Nisqually Tribal Admin Building, Rainier City Hall, Yelm Community Schools Administration and Roy City Hall.

The district is hopeful that voter turnout will rise after consecutive low numbers in 2024. Out of 19,048 registered voters in Thurston County, only 6,176 ballots were counted for a turnout percentage of 32.42% in the April 23 special election.

2025 legislative session

Amid the beginning of the legislative session and the start of a new gubernatorial administration, public education funding is on the minds of many in Washington state’s capitol campus. There are numerous bills that have been introduced in both the house and senate regarding the funding of public education.

Woods said districts are united in asking the legislature to prioritize special education, MSOC, and transportation, although he added the school district is not in as much of a need of funding for transportation compared to the other two components.

In an interview with the Nisqually Valley News, Rep. Andrew Barkis expressed the importance of addressing the public education system as well as concern regarding property taxes.

“Our schools are the pillar of our community and the future,” Barkis said. “But I can certainly understand the concerns and the burden that the voters and the people of the district are feeling with the ever-increasing costs that they’re dealing with. I don’t think anybody would disagree with or argue with the point that it is imperative that we take care of our schools.”

Barkis said he is “broadly” optimistic that legislation regarding special education, MSOC and transportation will be supported by his colleagues.

“Many of my colleagues are in our caucus…we were the ones that really led last year on additional funding for special education. We proposed a lot, and they passed some,” he said. “We will continue to be supportive of that. At the end of the day, we will argue the priority for education, but we’re competing against the argument for continuation of other programs. We will also remain adamantly opposed to increasing the tax burden for the people of Washington state.”

Four senate bills in particular are focused on adding funding for special education, MSOC and transportation. SB 5187 would direct OSPI to update the student transportation funding formula and immediately increase funding by a rate of $400 per student. SB 5192 would increase the MSOC allocation to school districts by 10% and adjust annually for inflation. SB 5263 would remove the 16% special education enrollment funding cap, among other changes. SB 5307 would also remove the special education enrollment cap and increase the special education funding multipliers.