[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6292718,"mediaKeyId","2525539-343f24b7367c7404e85196a660c7ecf6","parentId",2525539,"title","Teachers’ union and Mercer Island School Board discuss funding, federal policy risks and bond outreach","audioSeconds",3867,"startMs",2988000,"endMs",6855000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2525539-343f24b7367c7404e85196a660c7ecf6&start=2988&end=6855","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2525539-343f24b7367c7404e85196a660c7ecf6/thumbnail_2988000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6292718/Washington/Teachers-union-and-Mercer-Island-School-Board-discuss-funding-federal-policy-risks-and-bond-outreach","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6292718-5088f0a7f934a6a1d8a8cd32e56f3887/orig.mp4?Expires=1770962338&Signature=kD25knA6aQvZ7Ve75WCSb8R8qGWyGy2yRV56rKgcU1egVhZ7tc4~kfjeAhmIPUOVK6Wsrr3E1-4PWEgP4a5n6WEnM1raVyQTSYJlIxzQY1eX3pOOVFRNHkix5caZM8w7AgAwpPdffIqnqUUF2JgNFMKHSZwf9nnVAnFeBd71nYOTDaeu0~Ab~7KPsXNjVuhD-AC3vqmAIdMpkq9OL1D2vbQNiA3wSgv~cTOGRFenzGVdp3fdh~Guzm~vASGKulC4A9k63awJHrANs~sABnpwjUayGURaF2ouN7eAZ6u9Jx7zhGNMkaPNmz5sz7pWPGKa2u5xeoUmZQSib2d8niL2TA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Mercer Island School District, WA","date","2025-03-06T20:15:06Z","article","Representatives of the Mercer Island Education Association and the Mercer Island School District Board of Directors met in an annual linkage session to discuss federal and state legislation affecting public education, district funding priorities, competitive pay and community outreach for a planned bond proposition. Union representatives asked board members how the district is tracking legislation and how it would respond if federal policy changes threatened education funding or program delivery.

Why it matters: Union leaders told the board their members are particularly concerned about the district’s financial health, recruiting and retention, and potential federal or state policy shifts that could affect program obligations. Board members described ongoing advocacy work and urged coalition building with other districts to protect or increase state funding for special education, transportation and MSOC (materials, supplies and operating costs).

On legislative monitoring: The board identified two legislative representatives to follow federal and state developments and said it monitors bills and court actions that could affect district programs. One board director summarized district priorities as balancing competitive pay, maintaining a healthy fund balance, and funding student programs.

On federal funding risks: Board members noted that federal funding makes up a small share of district revenue (the presenters stated federal funding to the state is about 10.8% and the district receives roughly 3.9%), but cautioned that any changes in federal-to‑state flows or state backstops could reallocate costs to local levies and affect programming. Board members said they were watching higher education as a potential early indicator of federal policy shifts.

On competitive pay and retention: Union representatives raised concerns that district nurses and other staff can find higher pay in clinical or neighboring-district roles. The board said it reviews comparative salary data (OSPI tables, NEA surveys and Bureau of Labor Statistics reports) and advocates at the state level for regionalization and updates to the prototypical school model to better reflect levels of service such as nursing and special education positions.

On the bond proposition and misinformation: Board members said they had unanimously approved placing a bond proposal before voters and described outreach materials and recorded presentations on the district website. Directors and staff urged community members to use district materials for factual information and cited the district website and planned public presentations as primary sources. The board asked community groups to counter misinformation and stressed the bond focuses on buildings, safety and program space.

Next steps and community engagement: Board members encouraged continued partnership with MIEA, PTAs, student groups and neighboring districts for coalition advocacy on funding and for bond outreach. Student representatives reported meeting legislators and said student stories were effective in advocacy. Directors invited union and PTA leadership to request presentations and materials the district will make available to community groups.

Ending: The board and union agreed to continue regular collaboration on legislative advocacy, bond outreach and workforce issues. Both sides emphasized the need to prepare now for potential funding changes and to build local and regional coalitions to support district priorities.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","2025 02 27 MISD Board Linkage w MIEA","oneSentenceSummary","At the annual linkage session with the Mercer Island Education Association, union leaders and board members discussed legislative monitoring, federal funding risks, competitive pay, and community outreach for an upcoming school bond; the board said it supports the bond proposal and emphasized advocacy on state funding priorities.","taxTitle","Mercer Island School District, School Districts, Washington","taxId",57180,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6292722,"Mercer Island committee proposes strict naming policy, board asks for revisions",2867,83000,2950000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2525539-343f24b7367c7404e85196a660c7ecf6&start=83&end=2950","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2525539-343f24b7367c7404e85196a660c7ecf6/thumbnail_83000.jpg","/articles/6292722/Washington/Mercer-Island-committee-proposes-strict-naming-policy-board-asks-for-revisions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6292722-74b86c52f5d472b4ea0fd3c9bb783232/orig.mp4?Expires=1770962338&Signature=d-UZivhlLmeWXZFHO89G9BcHIZGuJ7Ghqhq2T-w7QNfCjt9dTwCcL6lSTLe1KiRnx5dVwmutEynSmE1Vu1hOG6~btRuio6-~AGf4dWdcRE8NqayGD~R7UlTp3vnaG4jD9~rp-unOsbIV9hmr4CRVSybBhOscybLDk7-QNbfnNL0UakhBHvcuGDMzJXQjgrRFZLxoTUajSMGqiI8nLwzgBd76NKcVrbVPw5Rr7VFQTarKbj7VvnXZZjdWNP-wJrNxFFtgqsHYxUf0N6gTOY6QgbY~lUBX~jYGy4Oo56RY~hPWkPpcieRZQ6PkjNUtxMn~STbzkGT5GGvOktvmccOv6Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A community committee convened by the Mercer Island School District presented a draft policy on naming school facilities and spaces that would set a high eligibility bar and limit how often namings occur, and the board asked staff and two directors to revise the draft before taking formal action. The committee recommended requiring nominees to have served the district at least 25 years and to be separated from district service for at least five years before eligibility; it also recommended a one-per-year limit on namings and that namings impose no ongoing cost to the district.

Why it matters: The policy is intended to create a predictable, community-informed process for recognizing individuals or places in district facilities and to avoid decisions driven by the \"loudest voice in the room,\" committee presenters told the board. In response, several board members and speakers said they wanted clearer limits on the size and prominence of recognitions, protections against inequity where wealthier nominating groups could dominate, and stronger language to ensure navigability of buildings for students and visitors.

The committee said it modeled the draft on naming policies adopted by other King County districts. The draft document would establish a committee to review nominations, collect public input (via email, webinars or meetings), and forward up to two recommendations annually to the board, with most years expected to produce zero or one nomination. The committee proposed that no naming create a cost to the district; any materials or installations would be funded by the nominating group.

On eligibility and duration, the draft sets two primary gates: an individual should have at least 25 years of service to the district and be separated from district service for at least five years. Committee members said those thresholds were chosen to insulate decisions from immediate emotion at retirements and to make namings exceptional.

Board members and others asked for changes. Questions and concerns included whether 25 years of service might exclude many contributors, whether the five-year separation was adequate or whether a review period tied to the naming’s physical duration (for example, 15 years) would be more suitable, and how to avoid a system that favors groups with more fundraising capacity. Several speakers said most committee support was for modest recognitions — plaques, small rooms or wing namings — rather than renaming entire schools or erecting large monuments.

Procedure and next steps: Board members directed Dan (board member) and one other director to draft revisions incorporating parameters discussed: limits on the number and size of namings in an initial implementation period, clearer guidance on how recognitions affect wayfinding in schools, and language addressing equity in nomination and funding. The committee presenter said the policy includes exceptions for \"truly exceptional\" circumstances (for example, the Seattle School District’s historical exception for John Stanford) and retains board discretion to decline or rescind a naming.

Quotes from the record included the committee presenter saying, \"This needs to be something special. We need to set the bar high,\" and that the policy was intended to avoid a process \"where the next loudest voice in the room will carry the day.\" A board member asked for explicit parameters on recognition formats, noting, \"There's a big difference between a small plaque inside a classroom and someone's name on top of the commons.\"

No formal adoption occurred. Instead, the board asked for a revised draft addressing the parameters and equity concerns and indicated it would return the item for further review at a later meeting. Committee members said they would provide edits and that the district staff would review operational feasibility (including maintenance and facilities constraints) with the revision.

Ending: The board framed the draft as a starting point intended to provide community guardrails if the public chooses to nominate individuals in the future. Directors asked that the revised draft make explicit limits to avoid a proliferation of namings and to preserve student wayfinding, and they asked the committee and staff to return with a revised policy for an upcoming reading.","A committee convened by the Mercer Island School District presented a draft naming policy that would set a high eligibility bar and limit how often namings occur; the board provided direction to revise language on duration, recognition parameters and equity concerns and asked two members to produce a revised draft for future consideration.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Teachers’ union and Mercer Island School Board discuss funding, federal policy risks and bond outreach

Mercer Island committee proposes strict naming policy, board asks for revisions