Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Funding Property Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would raise local levy caps and change property‑tax growth limit; school and local officials back changes, some residents oppose
Summary
Senate Bill 5812 would lift per‑pupil local levy caps, raise Local Effort Assistance thresholds, remove a special‑education enrollment cap, and revise the property‑tax growth limit formula; school and local officials urged the committee to advance the bill to avoid deep program cuts, while some residents opposed faster local tax growth.
Senate Bill 5812 would increase the statutory caps and thresholds for local school enrichment levies, modify special‑education accounting, and change the state and most local governments’ property‑tax revenue growth limit, staff told the Ways & Means Committee.
Kayla Hammer, committee staff, described changes to K–12 funding: raising the maximum per‑pupil levy limit, increasing the Local Effort Assistance (LEA) threshold in multiple steps, directing an OSPI‑led funding‑equity work group to report to the Legislature, and removing the enrollment cap used in special‑education excess‑cost calculations beginning in September 2028. Jeff Mitchell explained the property‑tax provision: replacing the current growth limit (the lesser of 1% or IPD) with a limit tied to population change plus inflation, measured by the lower of CPI or IPD, capped at 3%.
Staff presented an OSPI fiscal estimate of roughly $193 million general‑fund impact in 2025‑27 and a multi‑year increase in local levy revenue; staff also said the property‑tax change could increase state revenues by $818 million over four years under their assumptions.
School superintendents, teachers, student groups, higher‑education representatives and county leaders testified in support: Bellevue School District superintendent Kelly Aramaki and other district leaders said the measures would give districts tools to avoid staff and program cuts; student representatives said increased workforce and scholarship funding helps retain in‑state talent; county officials said the property‑tax growth limit adjustments would help counties keep up with rising costs for public safety and essential services.
Opponents included residents and taxpayer groups who said the change effectively allows faster local property‑tax growth and risks burdening homeowners, particularly seniors on fixed incomes. Witnesses urged further protections or voter approval mechanisms for local levy increases.
Committee staff said more detailed tables are available in the bill report and that the proposals would interact with the ongoing budget and local choices about levies and voter approvals.
