Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Option Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Piper Sandler outlines mechanics and risks of local option levy; district staff and teachers discuss next steps
Summary
A Piper Sandler presentation explained how Oregon's local option levies work, including assessed-value compression and state equalization grants. Teachers and board members discussed priorities, timelines and community outreach; the board agreed to continue exploring a levy and to receive a follow-up presentation in January.
David Williams of Piper Sandler presented an overview of Oregon's local option levy authority to the North Bend School District 13 board, explaining how Measure 50 created the assessed-value system and why that creates a variable, hard-to-predict revenue stream for levies.
Williams described the difference between levying a fixed dollar amount and a rate per $1,000 of assessed value, and walked the board through how "compression" reduces collections for some properties when total levies approach Measure 5 limits. He said the district's assessed value totals about $1.6 billion (roughly 54 percent of real market value districtwide) and that a $1.00 per $1,000 rate would have a theoretical maximum first-year collection of about $1,670,000 before accounting for compression. "There is not without doing a property by property analysis ... a way of reasonably projecting" exact first-year collections, Williams said.
Teacher and union organizer Christina (identified in the meeting as a staff member and OEA-PAC contact) told the board teachers had surveyed colleagues and that many reported larger class sizes and assignment changes this year. She said the union and staff prioritized reducing K'12 class size, restoring cut electives and supporting classified staff, and that the union's PAC would provide some campaign support so the district would not bear all campaign costs. Christina said a typical proposal around a $1.00-per-$1,000 rate would fund roughly 10 teaching positions, and urged careful budgeting because collections can be lower than projected in year one.
Board members asked detailed questions about timing, equalization grants and budgeting. Williams said passed local-option levies generate state equalization grants calculated on a 70th-percentile property-value-per-student benchmark and that those grants are subject to biennial legislative appropriation; he noted districts sometimes wait a year to receive those grants. Several board members and staff said community outreach and staff engagement would be necessary before placing a measure on a ballot. The board did not vote on any levy resolution; members signaled support for continued work. Superintendent Tim (staff member) and district staff said they would schedule listening sessions and return with a formal proposal and more precise financial scenarios for the board in January.
