Kennewick staff propose $29.5M EP&O and a "tech safety" levy; board directs resolution for Nov. 12

Kennewick School District staff presented a levy proposal during a board study session that would raise the district's EP&O ask to $29.5 million and change the existing technology levy into a "tech safety" levy to allow certain capital safety improvements to be funded from that levy. Staff said the board would be asked to approve a resolution on Nov. 12 to place the levy before voters in the Feb. 10 election.

The presentation, led by Dr. Carl Hart, laid out the district's budget picture: staff reported total state, federal and other grant revenues of about $288 million against budgeted expenditures near $339 million, leaving a funding gap staff estimated at roughly $50.8 million. "If we want to even sustain what we currently have right now, doing a simple 3% escalator just simply isn't mathematically enough," Dr. Hart said, explaining a model in which modest annual increases would let the gap grow to about $70 million in four years.

Why it matters: staff said local levies fund services and positions that the prototypical state funding model does not cover, including counselors, paraeducators, school nurses, school resource officers (SROs), extracurriculars, custodial staffing beyond state-funded FTE and certain technology and capital safety upgrades. Staff described the "tech safety" levy as keeping the existing technology purchases (computers, servers, software) while expressly allowing capital safety items such as facility hardening, perimeter fencing or upgraded glazing to be paid from the same levy; they emphasized personnel costs remain ineligible from the tech levy.

Key numbers and constraints described in the session: staff said the district's current EP&O was about $24.7 million, the LEA (local effort assistance) was expected at about $15.5 million, and the current tech levy at about $5.0 million for a combined local levy total of roughly $44.7 million. Staff also noted the district expects a budget-year deficit of about $8 million by August 2026 under current assumptions. A recent bond refinance was credited with saving approximately $33.6 million over the remaining life of the bond, lowering current debt service and helping keep the overall local rate lower than it otherwise would be.

On assessed value and timing, staff said about 40% of parcels will be reassessed to market value in 2028 and another 40% in 2029, with remaining parcels (mainly agricultural) in 2030; staff used preliminary assessed-value (AV) projections (the district's AV cited in discussion was roughly $16.5 billion) to model tax-rate impacts. Staff said a 5-cent increase in FY27 would yield about $900,000 in revenue under those projections. Using an example homeowner AV of about $400,000, staff noted a homeowner at a $3.03 combined rate was paying roughly $1,100 annually; staff said the district's goal was to keep the combined local rate near $3.00.

Board questions and direction: trustees asked about the district's relative position compared with neighbors and whether a small rate increase could add competitive academic or arts programs. Staff said Kennewick raises less local levy per FTE than many neighbors and argued the district is fiscally efficient; board members also asked whether the proposed levy could fund additional school nurses (staff said the district is "about 8 or 9 nurses short" and that LEA increases could help support added FTE). Trustees discussed voter fatigue and preferred a four-year levy for stability; several board members supported the "tech safety" phrasing for messaging, though staff noted EP&O is legally required to be labeled as EP&O and that levy descriptions and spending allocations would be spelled out in the resolution and voter materials.

Formal next steps and action: staff requested direction to prepare a levy resolution for the Nov. 12 board meeting. The board gave direction favoring a four-year term, the tech-safety framing for the technology levy, and a target combined local rate in the roughly $3.00 range; no formal vote or levy authorization occurred at the study session.

Funding and legal constraints cited: staff repeated that state-administered levies (state tax 1 and 2) are outside local control, that law places statutory limits on EP&O (described in the session as a $2.50 statutory maximum for EP&O), and that failing to maintain certain local levy rates can reduce LEA payments (staff said a $1.50 EP&O threshold has been treated as a rule of thumb tied to LEA eligibility). Staff also noted they could choose to collect less than the full levy authorization if AV or other conditions changed, enabling the district to hold the tax rate nearer to the board's $3 target.

What was not decided: no levy was formally authorized and no vote occurred; the board only provided direction to district staff to prepare a resolution for consideration on Nov. 12. The precise levy amounts and ballot language will be finalized in that resolution and accompanying materials.