Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Levy Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Othello board debates three-year, $1.50 levy amid budget shortfalls and timing pressure
Summary
School leaders recommended a three-year levy at about $1.50 per $1,000 assessed value and discussed whether to run in November or a February special election as the district projects deficits and a falling fund balance over the next four years.
The Othello School District Board discussed a staff recommendation to place a three-year local levy on the ballot — roughly $1.50 per $1,000 assessed value — to stabilize district finances in the face of projected shortfalls and potential federal grant losses. The recommendation, presented by district leadership, weighed timing (November vs. February), length (three years vs. four), and the amount needed to preserve services and fund balance.
Staff framed the vote as part of a broader fiscal plan: “If we keep it the same, we need 50%,” a member of administration said when describing the approval threshold and election mechanics. The recommendation was for a three-year levy timed to the February special-election calendar, allowing more time for informational outreach and coordination with associations; staff also presented a November option but cautioned that moving that quickly would compress preparation and communications.
The board was shown four-year budget projections that illustrate the pressure behind the recommendation. Staff presented 2025–26 projected revenues of about $84.5 million and expenditures of about $87 million, giving an initial fund-balance projection of $13.8 million and an ending balance of $11.1 million for the year — figures that assume the district receives the federal funds currently flagged as at risk. Staff warned that if the district does not receive the projected federal funds, the shortfall grows immediately. Finance staff also reported the district would have about 46 operating days of fund balance in 2025–26, below a 60-day level the State Auditor’s Office recommends as healthy and edging toward the 30-day “unhealthy” threshold in later projections.
Board members and staff discussed the trade-offs for election timing. November offers higher turnout and lower per-jurisdiction ballot cost when multiple measures run together, but board members worried about voter fatigue because Adams County intends to run a fire-district levy lift the same November. February offers more time for education and a focused ballot, but typically draws fewer voters; the district would pay a larger per-election cost, about $35,000, if it runs alone. District staff also explained a February “validation” rule: a levy needs 40% of the November turnout for the February result to validate, then 50% plus one of those votes in favor to pass.
Trustees pressed staff on how assessed-value changes could affect the levy’s buying power. Staff said the district’s 2023 experience — a large reassessment that reduced the state’s local effort assistance (LEA) despite voters approving a levy — informed preference for a shorter three-year cycle rather than a four-year levy. Staff noted that increasing the levy rate above $1.50 (for example, to $2.00) would raise additional local revenue (staff estimated roughly $1.5 million more per year at $2.00) but would not change the state’s maximum LEA; higher local rates also carry political risk and could be eroded by future reassessments.
No levy resolution was adopted at the meeting. Staff presented a draft resolution for first reading should the board choose a November timeline; the board asked staff to return with refined projections and communications plans. Several trustees said they supported the staff recommendation to aim for a three-year levy and to continue planning with the February special-election calendar to allow more outreach time. The district will bring a formal resolution back for board consideration if trustees decide to place the levy on a ballot.
