I hope you’ll join me in voting yes for both Proposition 1: School Construction Bond and Proposition 2: Replacement Technology/Capital Levy on or before Feb. 13. Our kids and our community are worthy of these investments for our future.
As a former director of the Edmonds School Board and its past president, I am uniquely aware of the funding challenges that plague not only our district, but others across the state. Whether we like it or not, school districts must depend almost entirely on local communities to provide this funding through voter-approved bonds or levies.
To be direct, the need is urgent. Nearly half of our 34 school campuses are over 50 years old and in serious need of replacement. Proposition 1, if approved, would do just that. It would fund the replacement of several schools, including Westgate Elementary (1958), Oak Heights Elementary (1967), College Place Elementary (1969), and College Place Middle School (1970) in addition to other critical safety and maintenance improvements. Proposition 2 would renew an expiring levy to ensure our students, staff and schools receive the equipment and technological infrastructure needed to support learning.
I have direct knowledge of the conditions of our many of our schools. I’ve walked their hallways. I’ve heard from their teachers. I’ve also studied the tax implications of these measures and how the district plans to pay for them. I offer two observations: first, that Proposition 1 and 2 are absolutely necessary, and second, the district has approached the drafting of both propositions in a fiscally prudent way, assuring that we maintain a low (relative to other districts in our region) and stable tax environment for the next 20 years.
Strong schools really do build strong communities. That’s why I support the upcoming school funding measures — because an investment in our students’ learning environments is a critical investment in our future. It shows our students that our community cares about where and how they learn.
I hope you’ll join me in voting yes on both Propositions 1 and 2 on or before Feb. 13.
— By Diana White
Diana White is an Edmonds resident and former director and past president of the Edmonds School Board.
I’m voting NO unless the bill 5770 currently going through Olympia’s legislature is repelled. Based on the report, this bill would at least TRIPLE the property taxes in WA, as if they are not high enough already.
It’s ridiculous. Enough of those politicians whose only accomplishment is increasing expenses; therefore, taxes.
Just take a look on how it starts:
“The legislature finds that the arbitrary 6 one percent limitation on the growth of property tax collections has
7 severely inhibited the ability of the state, counties, cities, and 8 other special districts to provide critical community services in the 9 face of significant population growth and inflation.”
I recall that the WA State Constitution already allocates funding for schools, which the legislature hasn’t been respecting and even got a slap from the State’s Supreme Court once (but that does not seem to have gone anywhere). They are causing population growth by bringing illegals. They are causing inflation by spending like drunkards in irresponsible projects and expenditures.
It’s bandits fleecing us from everywhere. So, no, enough is enough.
For anyone interested, here’s the info: https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=5770&Year=2023
This is not correct. Your property taxes will not increase 3x, it’s actually less than $2/month increase. Current your taxes for school spending in the City of Edmonds is $2.62 per $1000 of assessed value. Your taxes will increase to $2.65 in 2024 (if the bond and levy are both passed). For a house that is assessed at $750,000 would see a $22.50 increase to its annual property tax, so that’s less than $2 per month in an increase in taxes. There is nothing we can do about Bill 5770 but a simple yes on Prop 1 and Prop 2 will mean a lot to the children. Especially Proposition 2, if that does not pass we will lose librarians and technology-focused teachers, and would really hurt the progress of our children. So, please take a look at the Snohomish County assessors office at what you pay per year in school taxes and actually calculate those taxes, it is not that much of an increase.
I am voting yes. The schools on the docket for being helped by this bond are in dire straights. Consider for example:
* Facilities without consistent heat so teachers have to provide their own space heaters, and students bundle up in coats.
* A science lab where the emergency shower is right next to an electrical panel.
* Lack of toilets.
* A music classroom that is not ADA compliant.
* Asbestos tables.
* Open concept buildings that are nearly impossible to “lock down” in an active shooter situation.
* Boilers that fail and cause emergency cancelations of schools, leading parents to scramble for childcare.
The list goes on and on. If you don’t want to vote yes for the kids, vote yes for your home values. The decrepit state of many of our schools drives potential home buyers away to Kirkland and Bellevue where voters have proven they value education.
Oak Heights elementary, one of the oldest schools in the district, was built before modern building codes went into place. Even after they added a jail-like chain-link fence it’s still incredibly difficult to secure which is important to note because we’re talking about a school that’s had to lockdown for bears before. Actual bears.
I support the efforts to modernize and replace ageing district schools. As a homeowner I know that some expenses are unavoidable, especially as the age of these assets increase. They have served their communities well for sure, but now with many of them reaching 60+ years of service I’d rather have schools that reflect on our community goals, and support future generations of exceptional learning.
Regardless of other statewide legislation this current session, the proposed construction bond and levy have an outsize impact on students here locally. Delaying the inevitable replacement of any of these buildings will only cost us more later.
Please remember the McCleary decision where the court forced Wa lawmakers to use their budget to fund our public schools. They did. Now they would like more money. Let the state legislature dip into the budget and provide it or maybe ask the federal government. If we have money in the billions to fund Ukraine, israel and those here illegally maybe they could fund it.
It’s flabbergasting that it took more than five years and a $100,000/day fine for the legislature to increase the education budget (https://www.king5.com/article/news/education/washington-state-school-funding-mccleary/281-56eace14-fded-46c0-a1e8-2105d2cb7974) and apparently now that same legislature wants to strong-arm more money from the population for its (irresponsible) pet projects. Taking more than five years paying $100,000/day show how little those “representatives” care about other people’s money, and I wonder where all that money from the fines ended up.
My stand is still NO. If I decided to buy a house that is beyond my means (like the Edmonds’ council wants to do with that property in Hwy 99), open my house’s doors to complete strangers who will not contribute by any means to my family’s quality of life (like the WA government is doing with illegals), and spend way beyond my means (like the federal government has been doing and then printing money to fill the gaps), I cannot (and would not) strong-arm, extort, or swindle money from people who depend on me. It’s a basic rule of living in society that the people living there must respect each other’s rights. Ms. Thatcher wisely said that socialism is only good until the ones imposing it run out of other people’s money and we haven’t seen that thing succeed anywhere. We can see what this kind of irresponsible behavior does by seeing the big migration from California, New York and other places that implemented this irresponsible spending and increased taxes to fill the budget holes (beyond other issues). So, I cannot condone this kind of behavior and vote yes and add even more burdens to the population who work hard for their money and have limited budgets, mostly the elderly who live on SS and end up expelled from their homes by high taxes.
Yah, who cares that ”other people’s kids” sit in dank classrooms! They aren’t our kids anyway, right?
Just get your piece of the pie, sir!
If only the district held weekend tours to anybody in our community…people who have negative attitudes and feelings toward “other people’s” children could be swayed.
I am voting ‘yes’ on these bonds. The prior large construction bond issue was turned down by the voters, and it’s time to rebuild these schools. Construction costs increase significantly each year in our region, and a ‘no’ vote this time will just postpone the inevitable decision day and cause us to vote for even more expensive bonds. This is not an ‘if’ question, it is a ‘when’ question.
Some other commenters on this article are misinformed about the McCleary court decision and about how school construction is funded in Washington State. Regardless of whether you think our funding system is fair or stupid- it is what we’ve got for the foreseeable future.
My kids attended College Place middle school, and then the new Edmonds-Woodway High. The contrast between those two campuses was stark. It’s time for College Place buildings to go to the recycle yard.
Hi Theresa, the voters did turn down the last bond issue and ESD use another funding process called Construction Levy. 50% plus 1 will pass a construction levy but bonds require 60%+1. Construction Levies are used by other Districts and reduce the overall cost of building a new school by around 70-80 percent. The cost to finance a bond is significant.
Yes, others are not aware of what states role is in public education. Edmonds has around 20,000 kids and the state pays somewhere around $15,000 per kid. That says we get $300M. This bond is almost twice that amount, and the state does not have that kind of money to distribute for buildings. (2x300m=600m but this bond is for 597m so not twice!) With 1m kids we need to provide them with a place to go to school.
Caroline from Yes! for ESD Kids here. Really appreciate reading the views shared here. We wanted to highlight a few points worth considering:
1) While the state did increase funding for education statewide under McCleary, the state generally doesn’t fund construction, renovations or repairs of schools. School districts regrettably must fund these costs on their own. This is why a Schools Construction Bond is being run this year.
2) To one commenter’s point, the capital projects team at the district can provide a direct answer as to why they chose a bond. Our understanding is that, with so many schools over 50 years old and in need of replacement, a levy could not replace as many schools in the same time frame as a bond could. Additionally, a bond would allow our district to maintain a stable and low tax rate relative to our neighboring districts, and prevent taxes from going up from where they are today.
3) To the point about feeling overburdened by the state and with taxes. First, neither our district, nor our kids, determine state policy around school funding. And second, these two funding propositions don’t further our existing tax burden. They simply maintain them. If you have additional questions about this, please visit the district’s levy and bond webpage or email us at yesforesdkids@gmail.com. Thank you!
I curse the concept of state and local (County and City) governments in this country taxing the Hell out of middle class property to protect all the tax loop holes for the ultra rich and giant corporations; but good schools, just like good public safety, are serious NEEDS (not optional WANTS) so I will hold my nose and vote yes for schools. When the City starts putting measures for more property tax for for regional control of EMT and Fire and/or the purchase of real property that we cannot afford to buy, maintain, or clean up on the ballot; I will remain a firm no. On the other hand if there is some chance for taking back local control of our Fire and EMT services I would vote to raise our taxes to get that. I would also vote to raise our property taxes, if it was to enable having a truly and totally independent; possibly elected; City Attorney position. That position should have no connection to being in good standing with any Mayor, CM, or groups of CMs.
I have been torn on which way to vote on this. We did have a great school system in this city. This is why I chose Edmonds to buy a home. I read all of these comments and yeah we do have some say in how we vote statewide. Secondly, we don’t have a say on property taxes, little to say about much else it seems. However, I was a DA for a program almost 20 years ago for dental sealants 4 kids thru SHD. College Place I was in a lot. WE offered Sealants income appropriate or not. Insurance thru parents at their dental offices the other kids on gov. and such did not have these services offered. I SAW then units outside the main building and the main building were in bad condition and they were cold then too. Unacceptable. We DO need to replace schools. I will likely vote YES to pass this for one reason. I care about the kids. I don’t want the money used for anything but schools and academics, directly for the kids’ education and safety. I’d like to see better test scores too. Focus on Academics. Results needed this time. Everyone needs to give here!