State lawmakers throw wrench into school district funding plans
By Eric Valentine
A bill currently being considered by Idaho lawmakers that would limit bond and levy elections to November and May is throwing a bit of a wrench into a pending $40 million, 10-year Blaine County School District facilities proposal.
Nonetheless, at their Feb. 11 regular meeting, trustees unanimously decided to place the measure on the August ballot and are now scurrying to host at least one more public listening session to tailor the levy into something that could generate widespread support. The district and a special facilities committee have worked for months meeting with staff, parents and other taxpayers to craft a priority list of projects. But given the negative fallout associated with a previous and soon-to-run-out levy, folks are not confident the public is ready to foot the bill.
“The 2008-09 school district levy, to be blunt, was a felony,” said Valley resident John Galgano. “The district took a little less than $14 million from the stakeholders to build a promised elementary school. It didn’t happen.”
With funds from that levy nearing their end, the district has long known it will need to go out to the voters again. Special meetings, public surveys, and a whole lot of public debate later, BCSD is looking at a priority list of facilities upgrades, maintenance and overhauls it needs to find a way to pay for without pulling from the general fund. Enter what will now be the August levy.
Meanwhile, at the Statehouse in Boise, legislators have offered up House Bill 393 (HB393) aimed at making sure levies, bonds and other taxing mechanisms get voted on by the largest number of people. Voter turnout across America is rather low for most elections, but for smaller elections like ones held in March and August, it is abysmal.
“The intent is good,” said Superintendent GwenCarol Holmes. “But it’s just the alignment and requirements with district budgeting … that doesn’t line up.”
Holmes told trustees she had a chance to address the concern at a District 26 town hall hosted by state Sen. Michelle Stennett (D-Ketchum). Holmes said she explained the timing issues, such as how putting the levy on a November ballot would mean it would be 14 months before those funds would be available to the district.
“I know it’s in their consciousness,” Holmes said, referring to state lawmakers.
Board Vice Chair Kelly Green told fellow trustees that her inquiry with lawyers revealed if the bond was placed on the May ballot and HB 393 ultimately became law, it would likely not get grandfathered in and would mean the district would have to go out to voters again.
A May ballot levy would also give the district less time to make its case with the voters. And given the tenuous relationship between the district and a significant portion of the public, communication with voters and community buy-in is mission critical.
Ultimately, the board decided that putting the levy on the August ballot accomplished two things:
Enough time to build voter understanding and potential support
Enough time for the state to rewrite HB 393 or scrap it altogether
As of press deadline Tuesday, the district still did not have a public listening session date or location nailed down.