Levy failure fallout: Board hears critics, plans budget review

After the failure of their proposed $1.3 million levy last week, Colfax teachers, staff and school board members met for a public special meeting Feb. 15 to pinpoint a new direction for their levy.

“They just saw this huge dollar amount we asked for and didn’t understand we were trying to be pro-active,” said board member Laura Johnson.

Colfax superintendent, Michael Morgan, left, discusses levy options with district board members. Board members Laura Johnson (center) and Debbie Pearson (right) listen.

The district has two remaining county election dates to run the levy before Colfax voters.

The board will meet Feb. 27, 7 a.m., to re-examine cuts to levy-funded programs and staff for 2010 and 2011 in order to come up with a newer, tighter assessment for the new levy.

At that meeting, the board will pick line-by-line what the district absolutely can and cannot function without with its levy dollars.

The district’s new levy figure will most likely be decided by the board on the March 8 school board meeting.

District superintendent Michael Morgan told the board it had two choices when to run the next levy; the county’s April 27 ballot or the May 18 ballot.

The board held off on deciding which date, postponing that choice until its Feb. 22 board meeting.

Both dates leave the district with a tight turnaround of gauging why voters shot down the levy, redesigning a new levy proposal, and putting it on the ballot.

An information panel on the levy will be held at 6:30 p.m. Feb 22, in the library, an hour before the district’s board meeting.

On Tuesday, both the state Senate and House had bills on the floor which would restore levy equalization back into the state budget. The restoration move comes after Gov. Christine Gregoire initially proposed removing levy equalization funds from the budget.

Final decision on the fate of levy equalization will be decided when the state’s supplemental budget is approved in March, according to State Sen. Mark Schoesler.

“The intent of everyone here is that this is a high priority to put it back,” said Schoesler in a brief interview with the Gazette Tuesday.

A finalized budget will not likely be finalized until the March 11 adjournment date.

Levy equalization is a state program in which a district raises a levy from property sales tax, which is then matched by the state.

Many small districts rely heavily on this funding and the state has threatened to cut it this year.

The district’s levy measure, $1.3 million for next year and $1.35 million for 2011, included a portion of the anticipated revenue to be used for making up a possible loss of state revenue with local funds.

The board had vowed to roll back the excess of that $1.3 million in the event the state funding levels were maintained by the legislature.

Deciding the amount of the new Colfax levy proposal will, according to Becker, be determined by taking a line-by-line look at what the district can and cannot do without.

“As important as this is, we should get a half day [to discuss] because this is going to affect people’s lives,” said board member Steve Lyon as the board discussed its future strategy.

School staff and Colfax voters alike sounded off at Mondays night’s meeting on why they believed the levy failed and what could make a new proposition pass.

Nine people signed the register for the public session.

Teachers told the board they felt voters had little opportunity to learn in advance the dates and times for informational meetings conducted before the Feb 9 levy vote.

“I think there were things that limited public involvement,” said Colfax teacher Christopher Clausen, adding he thought “a lot of mistakes had been made.”

Clausen, who said he came as “an upset teacher” said he only learned of Monday’s special meeting because of a small notice in the Colfax Daily Bulletin.

“I think we need to ask questions and figure out what went wrong and take quick, corrective measures,” Clausen said.

County Treasurer Bob Lothspeich, who headed the Citizens for Quality Schools campaign, blamed the Gazette for printing articles which he believed swayed the public perception of the levy.

The Gazette reported in several stories the $1.3 million levy proposal was roughly a 40 percent increase over the current year levy of $930.000.

Lothspeich told the board he believed those front-page stories hurt support of the levy.

“Some people had their minds made up at that first headline,” he said.

Board member Debbie Pearson added people may not have understood the extra funds asked for by the school would be rolled back in the event levy equalization remains after the legislative session.

“People didn’t understand the rollback,” she said.

Colfax substitute teacher Michelle Miller repeated Clausen’s alarm at the lack of information announcing public meetings on the levy.

She asked the board and Lothspeich if they could have sent paperwork home with students or posted facts on the levy on the school’s Web site.

So much of what she and other faculty hear ends up just being rumors, Miller said.

“Where do we go for this?” she asked the board.

Clausen, Miller, two other teachers and Kirby Dailey decided at the meeting they would execute their own informal research as to why the levy failed. They were also interested in educating and lobbying Colfax voters on the levy.

The group, formed at the suggestion of Dailey, told the board they would like to hold an information panel an hour before the board’s Feb. 22 meeting, at 6:30 p.m.

Board members said they would like to hear the group’s findings by their Feb. 27 work session.

Dailey’s group will be calling neighbors and inviting them to the panel session, asking how they voted and for input on the future levy proposal.

A day after the session the group set up a Web site, colfaxschools.org. Colfax residents are encouraged to leave feedback on why they voted yes or no on the levy proposal.

The levy proposal received just over 43 percent of yes votes to fall short of the required 50 percent for approval.

None of those attending the Monday session presented an opposition viewpoint on the failed levy proposal.