Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Funding Levy Bond Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Northshore School Board reviews levy and bond options ahead of Feb. 2026 ballot
Summary
Board staff presented background on the district’s recurring Educational Programs & Operations levy, capital/technology levy and school bonds, reviewed local valuation and levy-history data, and asked the board for direction on the size and shape of a package to model for a February 2026 election.
Deputy Superintendent (name not specified) told the Northshore School District Board of Directors at a study session that staff will begin preparing recommendations for ballot measures to run in February 2026, starting with background on the district’s three recurring measures: the Educational Programs and Operations (EP&O) levy, a capital/technology levy and school bonds.
The presentation laid out how each revenue source works, current local data and how pending state legislation could change levy authority. "Levies are inflated by CPI," the Deputy Superintendent said, and added that other formula elements use the implicit price deflator. Staff showed that under current law the district could have collected about $70.4 million in 2024 but actually certified authority of about $65 million, leaving roughly $5 million of uncollected capacity.
The nut graf: The board must decide this year whether to seek voter authority on all three measures in February 2026 and, if so, what total tax-rate package to propose. That choice is constrained by state levy rules, local assessed valuation trends, and two active state bills that would increase levy authority if enacted.
Board members heard factual summaries and asked for follow-up modeling. Staff described levy limits and passage requirements: EP&O levies and capital levies require a simple majority (50% plus one), while bonds require a 60% supermajority and — for bonds only — a validation threshold tied to turnout (40% of voters who voted in the last November general election must vote on the bond question to validate it). The Deputy Superintendent noted that capital levies in Northshore have been used primarily for technology and that capital levies may be authorized for up to six years, while EP&O levies are typically up to four years.
Staff reviewed local trends: the district’s combined tax rate peaked around $5.30 per $1,000 of assessed value in earlier years and was $2.94 in 2024; assessed valuation rose sharply in 2023 and partially corrected in 2024. Staff also said the district still has "the last $75,000,000 to sell" from the 2022 bond authorization, and that selling that debt will raise the total rate in 2025–2026.
On programmatic need and state funding, staff said the district currently uses roughly $20 million of levy funds each year to backfill special education costs the district believes should be state-funded. "For our district, the biggest lift for us is needed in special education," the Deputy Superintendent said. Staff summarized two legislative proposals under active consideration: a House bill (referred to in the meeting as House Bill 1356) that would keep a per-pupil levy formula and increase the per-pupil allowance by $500 in 2026 and then add further indexing, and a Senate bill (referred to as Senate Bill 5593) that would return to a percentage-of-state-revenue approach (described in the meeting as 30% of state revenue). Staff presented projections that the House-bill scenario could increase the district’s available EP&O authority and that the Senate-bill scenario would provide more initial authority in 2027 under the bill as described by staff.
Board members asked for concrete taxpayer-level modeling and demographic context. Director Hayes and others requested examples showing how different total-rate packages would affect an average homeowner in the district and asked staff to model multiple scenarios that vary the split among EP&O, capital/technology and bond components while showing the total tax impact. Several directors emphasized communicating clearly to the community about how assessed-value changes have affected individual tax bills and requested comparative data versus neighboring districts.
Staff said the next steps will include task-force recommendations, phase-two project cost estimates for bond planning, and modeling of tax impacts and bond issuance scenarios for the board’s March meeting. There were no formal motions or votes at the study session.
Ending: The board agreed to return in a month with modeled packages and task-force updates to help the board determine the size of the ballot package it will place before voters in February 2026.
