Tumwater School District outlines staffing cuts after multi‑million dollar deficit

Tumwater School District officials told residents at a virtual budget town hall that the district faces a structural operating deficit of about $4.5 million for 2023–24 and expects roughly a $4 million shortfall for 2024–25, and that staffing reductions and other cuts are likely.

The disclosure, delivered by Ben Rick, assistant superintendent of finance and operations, and Kira Acker, a district staff member, came as the district presented three budget-cut options and said the school board appears to favor a middle approach that would close an estimated $6 million gap while rebuilding a modest reserve.

The deficit stems from post-pandemic enrollment declines and rising costs, officials said. "The district had developed a pretty significant structural operating deficit," Ben Rick said. Kira Acker told the town hall, "we ran a deficit of about $4,500,000," and said the district is carrying roughly 40 full‑time‑equivalent students below its budgeted enrollment this year. Acker estimated about 250 to 275 students did not return after the pandemic, reducing state funding tied to enrollment.

Why it matters: local tax and state funding formulas provide most K–12 revenue, and shrinking enrollment combined with rising insurance and energy costs has left the district unable to match ongoing spending with projected revenue. Officials said a portion of the funding gap is structural and not likely to be fully closed by anticipated state action during the legislative session.

During the work-session the board reviewed three conceptual options: (A) eliminate the operating deficit only; (B) eliminate the deficit and build a small operating surplus to reach board policy minimum fund balance (the board favored this approach); and (C) make deeper, immediate cuts to return the district to full compliance. Officials said the board "kind of seemed to coalesce around option B," which they estimated would require about $6 million in reductions.

District leaders explained that roughly 80 percent of K–12 costs are staffing related and the remaining 20 percent contains a few very large non‑personnel bills (for example, energy costs, running‑start/community‑college charges and district insurance) that individually can exceed $500,000, limiting how much can be saved without staffing changes. Officials cited an expected increase in liability and other insurance costs that could add more than $1 million in expenses next year.

Timing and next steps: staff told attendees the school board is likely to consider two resolutions at an upcoming meeting. The first resolution would begin the process by identifying central office and support‑service positions that would not be funded in the 2025–26 budget; a second resolution would address school‑level positions. Officials emphasized the resolutions would identify positions, not individual employees, and that names would not be included in the resolutions because seniority and bumping rights can change which person is affected.

On staffing options short of layoffs, district staff said several approaches are being considered. Ben Rick said the superintendent intends to propose furloughs for nonrepresented employees at the next board meeting; he stressed that furloughs and reduced hours are harder to apply to represented employee groups because of collective bargaining obligations. Officials said formal layoffs, where required, would take effect when current‑year contracts end and that work on staffing reductions will continue over the next six to eight weeks.

State funding and advocacy: officials said the governor's budget appeared to protect K–12 funding more than other areas but cautioned that governor proposals are not final; the legislature will decide final allocations. Superintendent Bogatin and staff encouraged public advocacy: the district posted a one‑stop resource linking local legislators and House Education Committee members and noted the Washington Association of School Superintendents had identified early session bills addressing materials and supplies, special education and transportation funding.

Public questions at the town hall asked whether a previous budget advisory committee had been reconstituted (staff said it has met three to four times and invited the questioner to join), whether the coming resolutions would name affected employees (they will not), and whether certificated instructional positions would be part of the immediate resolutions (staff said the imminent resolutions would focus on non‑instructional central office and support positions; certificated instructional staff represented by TEA or other bargaining units would be handled through separate processes).

For people seeking more detail, the district said the board work session recording and the PowerPoint with the three budget scenarios are posted on the district website and on YouTube.

The town hall concluded with an acknowledgement that while state action this session could help, district leaders do not expect legislative changes to fully close the district's current shortfall and said local decisions will be required to balance next year's budget.