Tacoma School Board reviews draft language, timeline and tax impacts for two February levies

District finance and operations staff updated the Tacoma School Board on two proposed February ballot measures: Proposition 1, an Educational Programs and Operations (EP&O) levy, and Proposition 2, a K‑12 technology replacement (capital) levy. Presenters said the board had received initial resolutions previously and that final consideration is scheduled for the next business meeting.

The presentation laid out why the levies are proposed, how levy law limits collections, the positions and services funded by the levies, estimated tax impacts on an average homeowner and the public communications timeline the district will run before ballots mail in January.

Rosalyn (last name not specified in the transcript), presenting financial context, said the district’s current assessed value was presented to the board as roughly $48.5 billion (the presenter noted uncertainty in the figure during the presentation). She explained the state levy calculation: school districts may collect the lesser of a per‑pupil cap (presented in session as $2,500 per student) or a rate per assessed value (presented as $1.50 per $1,000 of assessed value), and said staff are proposing levy language that would allow the district to collect up to the higher of the two formulas should state law change in future sessions.

Rosalyn said the EP&O levy funds staffing and day‑to‑day services that are not fully funded by the state. "Our prop 1 ... is funding nearly 500 positions for the district," she said, listing classroom teachers in excess of state allocations, librarians, nurses, counselors, paraeducators and custodians among levy‑funded roles.

Chad Stiller, presenting on the technology levy, said the district expects the technology levy to fund roughly 92 staff positions and lifecycle replacement for devices, staff computers, classroom audio‑visual equipment, network and radios, and other digital and physical security systems. He said the district is proposing $42.5 million for the technology levy to account for inflation and new needs.

Tax impact examples presented by staff used district averages and current law. Staff said the average Tacoma home value in 2025 is $517,526 and that the district estimates an average taxpayer increase (combined Prop 1 and Prop 2) of approximately $50.47 per month under the current law assumptions and the district’s proposed levy amounts. Roslyn noted that if the Legislature changes levy rules to allow collection up to the higher formula, those numbers would change.

Staff described statutory and administrative constraints: levies require a simple majority (50% plus one) to pass (distinct from bond measures that need 60%) and levies may be structured for one, two or four years (the district is proposing four). The district said the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction reviewed and approved the levy expenditure summary the district submitted.

Tanisha (last name not specified in the transcript) outlined the district’s facts‑only public information campaign (district web page, a flyer mailed to every address in Tacoma, a speakers bureau of about 20 trained volunteers to attend community meetings) and reminded board members that staff and district‑led communications may provide facts but must not advocate for the measures because board members and staff are subject to public disclosure rules.

Board members emphasized translating levy totals into people and services: staff and board suggested campaign communications emphasize that the EP&O levy would fund about 500 positions and the tech levy about 92 positions and show concrete examples of services and programs the levies support. Board members also asked for continued clarity about who pays (property owners; commercial property and residential property on the tax rolls) and impacts to renters.

No formal vote or final adoption of the resolutions occurred at the study session. Staff reminded the board that final reading and adoption of the resolutions is scheduled for the next business meeting (the presenters gave a timeline noting filing deadlines in December, ballots mailed in January and certification in February).