Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Levy Epo topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Quillayute Valley School District board leans toward $1.50-per-thousand four‑year EP&O levy for Feb. 2025 ballot

Quillayute Valley School District Board of Directors · April 24, 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 reviewed a proposed EP&O levy package and modeling, signaled support for a four‑year levy aimed at maximizing local effort assistance and timber dollars, and asked staff to prioritize projects and finalize ballot language by the Dec. 1 submission window.

Diana, who led the presentation, said the district intends to place an Educational Programs & Operations (EP&O) levy on the Feb. 2025 ballot and is targeting a $1.50-per-thousand levy to maximize Local Effort Assistance (LEA).

"Bonds are for buildings, levies are for learning," Diana said as she outlined the levy’s purpose and probable uses. She told the board they must work with the district attorney and secure OSPI sign-off before converting a resolution into ballot language, and she cited a Dec. 1 window to finalize those steps.

The presentation included a proposed spending breakdown: roughly 60% directed to unfunded staffing and state-mandated positions, about 13% to extracurricular programs, ~10% to technology, and smaller shares for maintenance, curriculum and transportation. Diana noted the district’s funding position depends on assessed valuations and uncertain timber receipts that affect the amount the district can collect and the LEA match it receives.

Board members pressed on timing and messaging. One member said many registered voters are not parents and urged the district to explain how LEA helps preserve staff and programs. Diana and staff described plans to hire consultants to run public messaging, run targeted surveys and produce a communications strategy that would pair levy outreach with later bond planning.

On levy length, staff recommended a four‑year term to give the community a stable collection rate over multiple cycles; the board expressed general support for a four‑year approach but asked staff to return with prioritized project lists and detailed spreadsheets before formally approving ballot language.

The district will refine the levy package, model multiple assessed-value growth scenarios, and bring draft resolutions and ballot language to the board for a follow-up vote at a subsequent meeting.