State superintendent urges education-first plan for proposed high-earner tax

Chris Reykdal, Washington’s state superintendent of public instruction, used a press conference to press lawmakers to prioritize education and middle‑class relief in a proposed plan to raise roughly $3.5 billion a year from a tax on high earners.

Reykdal said the state faces a “structural budget challenge” and argued that education should be the first call on any new revenue. “The state’s paramount duty is education,” he said, framing the proposal around early learning, basic K‑12 funding and higher‑education completion.

The spending priorities Reykdal outlined include directing about $1.4 billion annually to eliminate the state property tax on the first $300,000 of individual homeownership — a change he said would amount to roughly $640 a year for a typical homeowner — expanding universal access to early learning for 4‑year‑olds and fully funding basic education. He also proposed covering roughly two years of tuition and fees for college students at a cost he estimated at about $760 million.

Reykdal described the revenue source as an income tax on high earners that would exempt the first $1 million of family income and tax amounts above that at about 9.9 percent when fully in effect. “The legislature is talking about a roughly $3,500,000,000 a year revenue increase, from a tax on high, income earners,” he said, and warned most of that revenue would not take effect until 2029.

He placed special emphasis on early learning, saying universal access for 4‑year‑olds should be a minimum priority and arguing it would yield direct family savings. “If nothing else happened with existing revenue growth in this state budget over the next decade, we should prioritize universal access to early learning at a minimum for 4 year olds,” Reykdal said, adding that such access would save the average family about $15,000 for that age cohort.

On K‑12, Reykdal said special education and other non‑classroom costs have strained district budgets and that the state risks repeating past shortfalls tied to a constitutional funding obligation. He recommended universal school meals and eliminating dual‑credit fees — figures he cited included roughly $57,000,000 to cover dual‑credit costs and tens or hundreds of millions more to expand meals.

Describing higher education as a completion challenge rather than a pure enrollment goal, Reykdal urged investments that increase degree and credential completion. He argued that paying for the final two years for students who enroll would be a targeted way to increase completions and free up other aid dollars such as the Washington College Grant.

Reykdal sketched allocation shares for the package — roughly a third to two‑fifths for property‑tax relief, a quarter to fully fund basic education and around a quarter for higher‑education completion and access — and estimated combined long‑term savings for a typical middle‑class family could approach “$75 to $80,000” over many years if the package were enacted.

Reporters pressed Reykdal on design and timelines. Carlene Johnson of the Center Square asked why Reykdal opposed a separate federal tax‑credit program that some estimates place at about $732 million for education. “Why are you so vehemently opposed?” she asked. Reykdal replied that he was “not vehemently opposed” to families receiving tax relief but warned that the federal proposal, as conceived, lacked clear rules and could route public tax dollars to private or religious institutions without adequate public oversight. He said he preferred a model where accountable, elected officials retain control over how tax credits aimed at helping families would be structured.

Aspen Ford of the Washington State Standard asked whether Reykdal’s plan would use the entirety of the $3.5 billion revenue. Reykdal said it would not: the concept leaves about $350 million unrestricted for the general fund and, by funding some college years directly, could free roughly $200 million in Washington College Grant aid to be redeployed. He reiterated the revenue’s phased timing and urged a public dialogue ahead of legislative decisions.

Reykdal acknowledged the plan could face legal scrutiny and voter review. “This revenue will take a couple of years,” he said, and added that litigation, court review and a public vote were all possible steps in the process.

The superintendent closed by urging public discussion and polling on how Washington should deliver tax relief and education investments, and asked residents and reporters to engage with the conversation as lawmakers and the governor continue deliberations.