Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Bonds topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board weighs bond redesign after OSPI says state match needs high school built on existing site

Sultan School District Board · July 28, 2026
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

Board members were told OSPI’s current WACC/SCAP interpretation could force the district to surplus an existing high school if a replacement is built off-site, jeopardizing state matching dollars; the board asked staff to revise bond plans and told the bond attorney to prepare updated resolution language.

The Sultan School District board spent the bulk of its July 27 meeting debating how to preserve state matching dollars after district staff told members that the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) is interpreting WACC/SCAP rules to require a new high school to be built on the existing high-school site to qualify for state match. "Their current interpretation of the WACC is that if we were to build the high school on a new site, we would have to surplus the entire high school," the superintendent said. "You can't use it as a K–12 building."

Board members pressed staff on what that interpretation would mean for the district’s planned projects and for voters. Staff said building on the current site preserves SCAP match dollars but requires demolishing the existing high-school footprint as part of phased construction, while building off-site would forfeit roughly $15 million–$32 million in expected state match, placing more burden on local taxpayers. The superintendent described meetings with OSPI and bond attorneys and said the team has sought multiple opinions: "We met with OSPI... I think we've met six times with OSPI," the superintendent said, adding that staff found the interpretation before a bond campaign proceeded.

Members asked for specific options to present to voters, including trimming nonessential projects, delaying the vote to November, or increasing the bond ask to capture state match and reduce local tax impact. Several trustees expressed concern about demolishing a structurally usable building and emphasized clearer communications to the public about why a demolition could be necessary. The board directed staff to return with updated numbers and options at a special meeting before the county filing deadline if needed.