Tumwater board approves Resolution 082425 to reduce educational programs amid multi‑million dollar shortfall; school‑year 'Fresh' positions affected

The Tumwater School District Board of Directors voted to approve Resolution 082425, titled “Reduction in Educational Program,” a set of proposed staffing and program reductions the district says are necessary to address a multi‑million dollar budget shortfall.

Assistant Superintendent Ben Rarick presented the resolution and supporting exhibits during the board’s February meeting and said the board had previously set budget-reduction parameters at a January 9 work session. Rarick said the resolution represents the district’s second set of recommended structural savings for the 2025–26 school year.

Superintendent Kevin Bogatin explained the district’s fiscal context before the staff presentation, saying the district had discovered a larger-than-expected funding gap and had borrowed to meet payroll. “We had to borrow $7,500,000 to cover expenditures from the last school year,” he said. Staff later described the most recent shortfall figure as “at least $4,500,000” underfunding for personnel costs.

Assistant Superintendent Rehrig and other staff outlined the savings the board has already approved and the additional reductions covered by the resolution. Staff described Resolution 1 as producing roughly $2,500,000 in savings and said Resolution 2 (the item before the board) is expected to yield roughly $3,900,000; combined with other reductions and adjustments, staff said the measures put the district about $6,540,000 toward the board’s January target.

The exhibit listed positions proposed for nonrenewal for the 2025–26 school year and staff emphasized that the proposals affect next year’s contracts; no employees were summarily dismissed during the meeting. Rehrig told the board that individuals affected by position changes might be offered other positions in the district: “it’s important to make a distinction between positions and people in this case,” he said.

Staff provided two clarifications attendees repeatedly asked about: athletic director positions would be restructured (not eliminated) and the Fresh program’s summer offerings are not part of this resolution. On Fresh, Rehrig said: “Nothing in this resolution pertains to the summer program. What is at issue here is the school year contract.” He also said the proposed change would remove a full-time classified position and two release periods that supported the school-year Fresh classroom structure (the district described that as 8.5 student FTEs or 17 headcount under the current staffing model).

Public comment before the vote focused heavily on Fresh, the district’s farm-based re-engagement program. Kristen Maring, who said she has run Fresh for nine years, told the board the program served about 300 youth and that “nearly 90 percent of Fresh students go on to graduate.” Students and staff described Fresh as producing measurable benefits: a student who spoke said Fresh helped her improve grades and plan to graduate early; a Fresh paraeducator said the program taught students agriculture skills and “how to take care of each other.” Former Mayor Pete Kamat, an early Fresh supporter, asked the board to reconsider cuts, saying the program “has given kids confidence, and the ability to handle many difficult issues.”

Teacher and activities coordinator Dale Reeves described being told at Black Hills High School that his activities‑director role had been eliminated in a restructuring: “I was brought in. I was told I'm immediately dismissed or let go of my position that I've held for 27 years,” Reeves said during public comment, calling the process nontransparent. The board and staff said they had contacted impacted employees in advance of the meeting and repeatedly stressed the proposals are for next year’s staffing plan rather than immediate terminations.

Board members asked multiple questions about alternatives to personnel reductions. Staff described limited opportunities to find equivalent savings in non‑salary categories, noting large mandatory costs (insurance, running-start/flow‑through costs to South Puget Sound, utilities, transportation) and that many non‑salary line items are either contractual or non‑discretionary. Rarick said the district had reviewed non‑salary contracts and cut discretionary services where feasible but that non‑salary savings would not close the entire gap.

After discussion, a board member moved to approve Resolution 082425; another board member seconded. The board then voted to approve the resolution. During the roll call process, at least one member (Casey) was recorded as voting “aye,” and the chair announced the resolution passed.

Staff and board members acknowledged the cuts will reduce services and increase workloads for remaining staff but emphasized the district must restore fiscal stability to meet payroll and preserve core instructional services. Several board members reiterated a desire to prioritize highest-need students as reductions are implemented and to continue advocating for more state funding.

Votes at a glance

- Resolution 082425, “Reduction in Educational Program” — Outcome: approved. Motion: “I move that we approve resolution 082425, reduced educational support program.” (Mover: board member; second: board member.) Board announced the motion carried; at least one member, Casey, was recorded voting aye.

What the resolution does (summary of items in the exhibit)

- Proposes nonrenewal or restructuring of multiple positions for the 2025–26 school year, including central-office and site-level roles. Staff emphasized this targets next year’s contracts and not immediate terminations. - Restructures athletic-director roles from a full-time teaching position model to an administrative athletics/activities model, rather than eliminating athletic programs. - Adjusts school-year staffing that supports the Fresh program (8.5 student FTEs / 17 headcount under the current school‑year model); summer Fresh programming was described as unaffected by this resolution. - Estimated financial effect: Resolution 1 previously saved about $2,500,000; Resolution 2 is projected to save about $3,900,000; combined measures and other adjustments total approximately $6,540,000 toward the board’s January target.

Clarifying details and next steps

- Staff said affected employees may be offered alternative positions where available; the district will continue to examine legal and grant‑compliance obligations (for example with OSPI and other regulators) as it designs new delivery models for services such as multilingual‑learner programming. - Staff encouraged public input and said they will continue to explore non‑salary efficiencies; however, staff told the board non‑salary cuts alone could not close the funding gap. - The board and superintendent said they would continue legislative advocacy on state school‑funding issues.

The board adjourned at 7:59 p.m.