Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District proposes fee increases for 2025–26; administration cites cost recovery and fee‑waiver expansion
Summary
The administration presented proposed school‑based and facilities fees for 2025–26, including a notable increase in elementary strings/band fees, adjustments to facilities and parking fees, and an expansion of fee‑waiver eligibility tied to Oregon’s OEIG guidelines.
District administration presented two schedules of proposed fees for the 2025–26 school year: school‑based program fees and facilities‑use fees. The proposals are preliminary and will return for final adoption after public comment and board review.
Key items presented
- Elementary strings/band fees: administration said a proposed fee increase would more than double the current elementary strings/band charge; presenters noted fee‑waiver and assistance options remain available and that staff could offer payment plans or quarterly billing. - Before‑school program and after‑school fees: administrators said the before‑school program has historically operated at a deficit; proposed fee changes and staffing adjustments aim to bring the program closer to break‑even at current participation levels (roughly 120–130 students reported). - Facilities and parking: staff discussed facility hourly rates and a student parking permit fee; the board asked staff to consider family caps to limit total burden for multi‑student households. - Out‑of‑district differentials: administration proposed higher fees for out‑of‑district participants in district programs (for example, driver‑education seats), to reflect that district taxpayers subsidize facilities and infrastructure. - Fee‑waiver eligibility: staff said the district will adopt Oregon’s Expanded Income Guidelines (OEIG) for fee‑waiver eligibility, which generally increases the income thresholds (the presenter said OEIG figures run roughly 40–60% higher than the older federal benchmarks, expanding eligibility).
Presenter comments and board discussion: presenters justified increases by pointing to higher district operating costs, inflation and the need to reduce program deficits. Board members asked for family‑cap options, for payment plans and for more detail on comparative rates at neighboring districts.
Next steps: the proposed fees will be revised for public comment and returned as a recommended schedule at the district’s first May meeting; staff said they will include waiver details and potential payment schedules.
Ending: the board received the proposed fee schedules as information; no final vote was taken Tuesday.
