Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal wants a big ramp up in spending on Washington public schools in the next state budget.
How big? Try $2.9 billion.
A third of those new dollars would go to fully fund special education. Another $695 million to add and retain classified staff with higher pay. And $350 million is sought to cover inflationary costs of materials and supplies.
Those are the largest sums in the 2025-27 budget request Reykdal sent to Gov. Jay Inslee, who will consider it as he pens the spending plan he’ll put out in December. That document will be a template for the next governor and budget writers in the state Legislature in the 2025 session.
“No matter how you look at the numbers, Washington currently underfunds K–12 education by around $4 billion per year,” Reykdal wrote Inslee on Monday. “I know that you and lawmakers will have some very difficult decisions to make, but our students and families need the state to step up and affirm the importance of public education.”
In the current two-year operating budget, Washington is spending roughly $30.6 billion of the general fund – the cache of state tax dollars used to fund day-to-day operations – on public schools, according to figures supplied by Reykdal’s office. That works out to 43%, down from the high-water mark of over 50% in 2019, he wrote.
Right now, he notes, the state is not living up to its constitutional obligations to cover the full costs of basic education which, he said, starts with fully funding special education.
On special education, he is seeking $1 billion – $300 million next fiscal year and $700 million the following year. This would enable lifting a cap on state funding for special education programs and covering these services for those up to age 22. Reykdal also wants to track increases in enrollment of students in need of special services.
Student transportation is another area the state is not providing adequate funding. Reykdal asks for $152.5 million in the next budget “to provide reliable transportation to and from school for special passengers, including special education students, homeless students, and students in foster care.”
Funding for materials, supplies, and operating costs, or MSOC, is not keeping pace with inflation. Reykdal is seeking $350.7 million in the next two-year cycle to deal with a nearly 9.5% surge of costs.
“School districts’ purchasing power has decreased because of inflation,” he explains in the budget request. “When districts aren’t sufficiently resourced to cover the costs of the basics, they have to make cuts elsewhere—to programs, staffing, and other areas.”
He is pushing for $695 million to solidify the ranks of classified staff whom he describes in the request as “the foundation of a functioning K–12 education system.” This group of employees include paraeducators, health services workers, clerical professionals and IT technicians.
The bulk of the new dollars would go into those four areas. But Reykdal is seeking funds for several other services and programs because, he told Inslee, “schools today are expected to do everything from feeding and educating students, to supporting, protecting, and nurturing their developmental, physical, and mental health.”
And that is on top of additional dollars to maintain existing programs in which costs are rising.
For example, 70% of students are getting free meals this school year. It will take another $17.4 million to maintain the program, according to the budget request.
Reykdal will discuss the request at a news conference on Monday, Sept. 23 at 10 a.m. It will be streamed live on TVW.
— By Jerry Cornfield, Washington State Standard
Washington State Standard is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Washington State Standard maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Bill Lucia for questions: info@washingtonstatestandard.com. Follow Washington State Standard on Facebook and X.
I didn’t know we had a 70% poverty rate, how could 70% of students qualify for free meals? I am not against schools providing food to students but why aren’t the remaining 30% of students getting it. Certainly the food system is broken. Does anyone think pouring more money into it will fix it? We have a obesity problem in this country kids today won’t eat anything but junk food I wonder how much of what is being given out is just ending up in the garbage.
Jim, to qualify for free or reduced lunch, you need to be making less than 185% of the federal poverty level, which would be $57,000 for a family of 4. The remaining students do not qualify because we are not putting enough money into the program to feed our students. The obesity problem has nothing to do with this. Of course kids only want junk food, their bodies and brains are predisposed to want high calorie sweet foods. Its up to the adults in their lives to provide healthy food, and at the end of the day, its cheaper and quicker to buy a frozen pizza than it is to make a homemade meal from scratch.
I find it hard to believe 70% fall into that category do you require proof of need or is it on the honor system? I know from my time in school and my children’s time that much of what was provided was thrown away, I don’t know how things are done now but there must be a huge amount of waste. I agree eating habits are developed at home. Maybe we would be better off just providing snack bars and soda pop instead of real food it would be a lot cheaper and there would be little waste. My kids who qualified for free food brought their lunch most of the time because they didn’t like most of what was served. Maybe we should get rid of the food program and just increase the amount given on food cards where you need to prove proof of need and have kids bring their own. Food for thought.
State GF to schools around $15b per year or about $15k per kid. Statement says we may be underfunding by $4b/yr. That would mean about 25% increase to fully fund. That would suggest the kid cost would need to go up to $19k/kid to “fully fund” We are allowed to currently add about $2500/kid with local levy and that would suggest the state sees the cost of educating a kid is now up to $21.5k/yr?? Data shows that building costs add about $3k/kid so the total cost would estimate to be $24-25k/yr. Some of these numbers may need a bit a tweaking but the bottom line is:
1. We need to education our kids. Please forget all the trigger points of testing and all that.
2. Can we find more cost-effective ways to do that job for less than $25k/kid?
Time to get off the stool in the corner with our dunce caps on and put on our thinking caps and make a better more cost-effective education system.
It doesn’t pay just for tuition. it is everything. equipment, building maintenance and repairs, rebuilding schools that are falling apart, transportation costs, all the materials including books, Chromebooks, and so on. If you can find a way to pay for all that for less, they are hiring. college costs way more and students don’t even get books. so 25k per student is cheap.
Isn’t instate tuition only about 12 grand at the UW? Add books and supplies I don’t think you get even close to 25 grand. If so then why does k-12 cost or need to cost so much more nearly double?
You hit the nail on the head!
Find ways to cut administrative bulk – what really needs to be administrated? As in medicine, more and more paper and paperwork time are clogging admin. This needs studying and some ruthless snipping. Trust teachers and let them teach!
Look into the amount spent of varsity sports and facility upkeep. Hint – “lifetime sports” cost less and are, well, something kids can enjoy all their lives.
Just two ideas, but based on 16 years teaching and a lifetime of coaching…
Good ideas Nathaniel. One thing that would definitely save money would be to reduce the number of school districts we have in the state. Today we have 295 and each have a staff and other functions that could be consolidated with other districts. For example, could we combine Edmonds, Mukilteo, and Everett? Combining some functions would save staff dollars. But what will happen is the argument of “Local Control” will be advanced as the reason we need to have separate districts. I have already heard from some active in schools people that we really need to break up the ESD. The argument is if we had a School distinct just for the city, we would be able to build newer buildings. We likely could save a lot of money by consolidating many of the staff functions.
Advancing consolidation will not likely come from within. We the people should weigh in on such ideas.
Darrol you make a good point, I guess how do you consolidate without losing control. Redundancy in government offers benefits but at much higher social costs, same with schools. Ain’t nothing easy or cheap with the way we do things. That said government has turned simple into the most complicated of things and that cost is bankrupting everything including schools.
The word “social” shouldn’t be there. My bad, social loss occurs when a large body’s think that consolidation of assets leads to better outcomes. Or at least when it involves dismantling individual say in matters like school which have already subcome to political influence. I guess if diminishing returns is acceptable in children then it is all good then no worries.