Citizen Portal

Emmett trustees weigh $1 million vs. $2.3 million levy to fund behavioral supports and building maintenance

Emmett Independent District School Board · February 16, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Superintendent presented two levy options: a $1 million supplemental levy intended to use $2.92 money differently with no net new tax, and a $2.3 million option that would raise roughly $300,000 for a K–5 behavioral program plus maintenance and custodial contracts; trustees agreed to hold a work session and consider ballot language by March 13.

The Emmett Independent District board spent an extended portion of its meeting discussing ballot-timing and community outreach for a potential supplemental levy that must be finalized by March 13 if placed before voters in May.

Superintendent Woods outlined two options the board asked staff to prepare: a $1,000,000 supplemental levy that would reallocate $2.92 money without increasing tax rates for most homeowners, and a larger $2.3 million proposal that would provide about $300,000 in new recurring funding directed to a K–5 behavioral program and $700,000 toward custodial and maintenance contracts.

"What $1,000,000 does is it gives us flexibility with our $2.92 money, and it won't cost the taxpayers anything," Woods said. He added that the $2.3 million scenario would raise the district's capacity to fund prioritized maintenance projects and the behavioral supports trustees requested.

Trustees debated messaging and political feasibility, noting that the larger levy has more 'sticker shock' but would enable both personnel and building projects. One trustee suggested conducting a community survey and holding a work session with stakeholders to better explain how each option would be spent; another urged keeping the ask modest to maximize the chance of passage.

No formal levy motion was made; trustees directed staff to draft ballot language for the options and to schedule a work session (Tuesdays or Thursdays preferred) so the board can present clearer spending plans to the public before a March decision.