Pasco School Board approves replacement EP&O levy, declines pro/con statements for voters' pamphlet

The Pasco School District board on Nov. 18 voted unanimously to place a replacement Educational Programs and Operations (EP&O) levy before voters in a special election scheduled for Feb. 10, 2026.

The board approved Resolution No. 1061, which as presented would seek roughly $35.5 million for collection in 2027, about $37.15 million in 2028, $39.375 million in 2029 and approximately $41.74 million in 2030, with an estimated levy rate of $2.17 per $1,000 assessed value. Dr. Castilleja, the district fiscal lead, told the board the levy is intended to replace an expiring levy and to pay for costs the state does not cover, including technology, curriculum, extracurricular activities, counselors, nurses and transportation. He said the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) granted pre‑ballot approval and that passing the levy would also qualify the district for state levy equalization funds.

A board member moved to approve the resolution “as presented”; another member seconded. The roll-call vote recorded “Yes/Aye” from members present and the motion carried unanimously. The board directed staff to collect signatures and submit the explanatory statement and resolution paperwork to Franklin County by the county filing deadline (staff identified Dec. 12 as the district’s target for hand‑delivering filing materials).

On the same topic, the board considered appointing district volunteers to the pro and con committees that write statements for the Franklin County voters' pamphlet. Staff reported no volunteers had applied by the Nov. 6 deadline. The board moved to appoint no one to either the pro or con committees; that motion also passed unanimously. Dr. Castilleja explained that if the county auditor later receives volunteers the county will recruit and make appointments as allowed by statute.

Board members praised the district’s year‑long, methodical levy development process and asked clarifying questions about assessed‑value growth assumptions and rounding used in the levy‑rate calculations. Dr. Castilleja said the district used conservative assessed‑value growth assumptions (about 4–6% across the four years) and that the levy amounts themselves are fixed regardless of actual assessed‑value changes.

Next steps include board signatures on the resolution and the district’s public‑information rollout; staff indicated levy fact‑sharing meetings would begin immediately.

Votes at a glance: Resolution No. 1061 — approved unanimously by roll call.