Today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer' article about the upcoming Seattle School Levy is disappointingly incomplete:
Seattle taxpayers will vote Feb. 3 on a $178 million capital levy that would pay for almost 700 projects at schools around the district, from new athletic fields to renovated libraries, and a $338 million operating levy that represents 23 percent of the district's annual budget. Both are renewals of earlier levies.First of all, it's not Seattle's taxpayers who will vote, but its eligible voters, a big difference. What is most astonishing is that nowhere in either the article or the accompanying Q&A with Superintendent Raj Manhas does the P-I explain the cost of the levy to an individual taxpayer. The closest thing is this chart with the number $2.39. Unfortunately, $2.39 has only limited relevance here. Worse, there is this howler of evasion from Superintendent Manhas:
Q: How would the levies affect property taxes?In fact, what we're really wondering is how much more tax one would pay under the scenario that the levy passes than under the scenario that the levy does not pass? The P-I isn't any more help than the Superintendent is. Indeed, to calculate the answer you need to look at both the official text of the ballot measures and at the School District's levy brochure.A: If approved, tax rates would remain the same. The combined school tax rates would actually decline over the next few years.
It is, in fact, impossible to give a precise answer, because the levies are for fixed amounts and will be shared proportionally by all property taxpayers. So the exact annual ad valorem rates will depend on the as yet unknown appreciation in assessed values. But combining the estimated ad valorem rates in the official ballot statement, with the estimate of 6% annual appreciation that was used to prepare the official ballot, I get the following ad valorem rates, applied to the most recent assessed property value (per thousand dollars) for the 3-year operating, and 6-year capital levies:
| Year | Operating Levy | Capital Levy | Total |
| 2005 | $1.28 | $0.35 | $1.63 |
| 2006 | $1.34 | $0.35 | $1.69 |
| 2007 | $1.38 | $0.36 | $1.74 |
| 2008 | $0.35 | ||
| 2009 | $0.35 | ||
| 2010 | $0.35 |
It's only fair for voters to consider not only how much good levy funds might do (if spent properly), but also how much each of us have to pay for the levy. If either the School District or the P-I was doing its job properly, they would have published a financial analysis like I did. But they didn't.
I support educational levies in principle, provided however that there is transparency and accountability in how the funds are used. The School District attempt to whitewash the actual cost of the levy does little to bolster my confidence that the money will be spent as responsibly as it should.
UPDATE: I did some more exhaustive analysis on the cost of the levies here and explain my reasons for voting against the levies here
Meanwhile in the state legislature
The Washington House of Representatives passed a bill last night to amend the state constitution to relax the requirements for approving school levies. Levies currently require 60% supermajorities to pass, but the House's measure would lower that threshhold to a simple majority. The yea votes included representatives from both parties whose views I respect on a number of issues, so I assume they have sound reasons for supporting this bill. I just don't know yet what those reasons might be.
The levy votes are one of the few ways that voters can hold a school system accountable for performance and fiscal responsibility. Given the inadequacy of public discussion about the true cost of school levies that I showed above, it seems that making it easier to pass a levy would only make it easier for school districts to raise taxes without corresponding improvements in performance or accountability.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 20, 2004 11:35 AMShark,
I don't live up your way - being a citizen of Sacramento - but I follow your comments carefully. The table about school levies ranks near the top of any blog I've seen. Outstanding public service! Thanks so much.
You shouldn't be surprised that the P-I and the Superintendent aren't much help given the calculations you've made.
Bob R
Posted by: Bob Reynolds on January 20, 2004 02:42 PMShark,
The importance of the 60% majority vote is that almost all districts run levies at special elections, typically in February. Since there are rarely other issues of significance on the ballot, turnout is low and you can be sure that the education lobby GOTV efforts skew the voter turnout in their direction. If they are also removing the minimum turnout requirement (which I suspect they are) then there won't be another levy defeated in WA state in my lifetime.
Posted by: Tim on January 23, 2004 10:57 PMWe are a group of parents who are having big problems with the Seattle School District. They are not there for our kids but for the money. There is a disabled child who desperately needs an aid and for the last 3 years they denied him one pointing fingers at each other. They are insensitive, rude, arogant and incapabile. All the money in the world can't fix their problem.
They also allow racial discrimination in school and segregation and do nothing about it, although it was brought to their attention (and by the way I'm white). Do you know of a website where we can find someone who might be willing to help or one against the levies because money does not go to the children or the teachers (see past history). They are not held accountable for anything. They can waist it all because the taxpayers will gladly give them more to waste in the name of their kids.