Levy Q&A

School levies are local tax measures that require a 50% approval from voters.  These levies generate revenue for specific purposes, such as funding operating expenses, maintaining educational programs, or supporting capital projects (small scale).  Unlike bonds, which involve borrowing money through the issuance of debt, a levy is a direct tax on property owners that provides a continuous stream of funding throughout the duration of the levy.

School bonds are a type of extended financial obligation that requires a 60% majority approval from voters. Districts receive the funds upfront, rather than continuously over a period of years.  The repayment of these bonds is sustained by property taxes, encompassing both the debt and the accrued interest. The fundamental objective of a bond is to finance enduring projects, including the construction of new schools, the expansion of current facilities, or substantial enhancements to educational infrastructure. Essentially, school bonds serve as a mechanism for districts to secure funding for projects that surpass the constraints of their yearly operating budgets.

In 2012, the Washington State Supreme Court issued a ruling that the state had not been meeting its constitutional duty to amply fund basic education.  The court held that the state’s funding system relied too heavily on local levies, leading to inequities between districts.  In 2017, the Washington State Legislature passed a funding plan to meet the funding requirements of basic education.  To fund this, the state legislature increased state tax rates and imposed local levy lids (limits).

The state’s funding plan is based on various funding formulas and prototypical models in order to meet basic education requirements provided in RCW 123.  State funding does not provide for instruction or activities beyond these basic requirements, such as after school activities or transportation that covers an unusually large geographical area.  The state’s formulas and models also do not take into account individual district needs or priorities.  Additionally, many of these formulas or models are not adjusted frequently enough to account for rising inflation costs or new educational demands, such as the rising cost of insurance and the need for one to one student technology devices. 

State and Federal Laws require that districts follow many different accounting requirements.  This means that costs must be accounted for in different funds, like the General Fund and the Capital Projects Fund.  Likewise, these levies must be approved separately.

An Educational Programs and Operations (EP&O) Levy is used to support the general operating costs and additional student activities that aren’t provided for in the state’s basic education requirements, ensuring that necessary resources are available to provide quality education.  These funds are accounted for in the General Fund. The maximum levy life allowable by law is 4 years. 

A Capital Levy provides the funds for larger scale projects or maintenance to the physical infrastructure and assets of the educational system, such as roof replacements or technology infrastructure updates.  These activities are accounted for in the Capital Projects Fund.  The maximum levy life allowable by law is 6 years.

• $2.05 per $1,000 Educational Programs and Operations Levy 

• $  .45 per $1,000  Capital Projects Levy  

• $2.50 per $1,000  Combined maximum rate  

New construction could lower this combined rate since more property owners would share in the total levies costs. Below are examples of the maximum combined rate cost:

Tax rates and tax bills are never the same from year to year.  The levies have a maximum dollar amount that the District could collect each year.  For example, in 2025 the maximum combined amount that the District could levy and collect is $8,026,500.  This amount is shared across all taxpayers.  As new construction occurs, that amount is now shared across a wider base.  This results in a lower combined rate that continues to decrease with additional construction. 

Historically, in Eatonville, most taxpayers see a higher tax bill during the first year of the levy even if the published rate is lower than the previous levy.  As new construction is added, the overall tax bill declines.  This typically results in a lower average tax rate.  

• Eatonville $2.05

• Clover Park $2.36

• Carbonado $2.50

• Rainier $2.50

• Rochester $2.50

• Tenino $2.50

• Sumner-Bonney Lake $2.50 (year one is $2.48)

• Yelm $2.50

(Additional school districts and rates are available on each county assessor's website.)

Yes.  There are exemptions for low income seniors and persons with disabilities.  Information about this program is available here.

The Eatonville Board of Directors would meet and make decisions about how to proceed. This may include rerunning the levy/levies again in the same fiscal year, with or without modification.  Running an additional levy would cost the District  thousands of dollars, depending on how many other districts share that cost.

• All coaches and sports related expenses (uniforms, equipment and transportation)

• All extra-curricular activities and clubs

• Music, Art and Drama

• Field Trips

• Swimming Pool and Swim Lessons

• Graduation Costs

• Security Camera Licenses

• GRITS Farm maintenance

• Insurance and Utilities

• $300-$400K in unfunded Transportation Costs due to the geographical size of the district

• $200-$300K in unfunded Child Nutrition Costs

• Technology Supplies beyond the state’s funding model

• General facility repairs (indoor and outdoor) due to daily use by 2,000+ students/staff

• Replacement of equipment that is necessary to maintain facilities, such as mowers, floor scrubbers

• 25% of all district employees

• Art & Music Teachers

• 1 Social Worker

• 1 Athletic Director

• 2 Assistant Principals

• Teaching & Learning Staff (partially funded)

• 15 Paraeducators

• 1 Security Guard

• 2 Technology Staff

• 5 Media/Library Staff

• 2 Custodians

• 3 Secretaries/Office Clerks

• 3 Facilities/Maintenance/Grounds

• Classified Substitutes

• Certificated Substitutes (partially funded)

• Additional staff to support Child Nutrition, Transportation and the Business Office

The District recognizes that test scores and other measures of academic performance need work, as well as overall student citizenship and engagement.

Student achievement has been adversely impacted over the last few years due to various extraordinary circumstances.  Turning points from this include leadership changes, a new strategic plan, revitalized teacher partnerships, parent and community involvement and improved transportation.  The District remains committed to its core mission to inspire lifelong learners by providing opportunities for growth and academic achievement in a respectful and caring environment.  

• Playground improvements and replacements

• New track and a new field

• Major repairs and/or replacements to:

  • Roofs

  • Gutters

  • Heating/Cooling systems

  • Swimming Pool & Athletic Facility Infrastructure

• Technology Infrastructure and Devices

• Safety and Security Upgrades

• Lighting/Energy upgrades to comply with the Clean Buildings Act and decrease utility costs

(Grant funds will be utilized to offset some of these project costs.)

Projects are continually evaluated and prioritized based on essentials, grant opportunities and available funding. 

The first priority is to maintain current assets and safe learning environments.  Projects such as roofs, gutters, internet infrastructure and heating/cooling systems will receive first priority if building integrity or essential functionality is at risk.  These types of projects will occur periodically over the life of the levy.

The District and the School Board are committed to addressing the track, the field and the playgrounds within the levy timeline, but as soon as possible. 

In comparison to a bond, there is a significant tax savings in a levy.  While a bond would provide upfront funding for “immediate” implementation of capital projects, it would also result in ongoing interest payments. Bonds require voters to pay back the principal and interest of the bond for decades, typically for 20-30 years.

Yes, all three elementary playgrounds will be included in the upgrades.

Much of the playground equipment is reaching the end of its useful life.  Recently, play structures have had to be removed due to safety issues.  Other play structures are approaching the need of major repairs or complete replacement.  Additionally, the playgrounds are inaccessible to students with disabilities.    

The District is currently working with the Department of Health, Washington State Risk Management Pool, and various consultants to determine best approaches to meet current needs and address safety concerns.

While the media (currently pea gravel) and much of the play structures will need to be replaced, there may be some structures with useful life remaining.  The District will consider replacement costs versus maintenance/repair costs.    

The track needs to be entirely replaced.  It was last renovated in 1998.  In addition to the visible cracking to the top rubber layer, the foundation beneath is cracking.  Safety concerns may include uneven surfaces, reduced traction, increased impact on joints, inadequate shock absorption, decreased stability and hazards related to accumulating debris.    

The new field would be synthetic turf.  The existing natural grass field limits activities due to fluctuating field conditions.  A synthetic turf would broaden the range of sports and allow for non-sport activities, as well as opportunities for community partnership organizations.  

The District recognizes that some organizations or individuals may have safety concerns in regards to the materials used in artificial turf.  Eatonville School District would be one of the last schools in Washington State to invest in a new artificial turf field.  The District would leverage this by evaluating the newest guidance and recommendations provided by relevant authorities in order to provide students and kids with the safest possible playing conditions and opportunities. 

A new track and synthetic turf would increase safety and versatility, expanding its utility to community-wide usage.  Access would include high school and middle school sports as well as community partnership organizations, such as EYSA, Junior Cruisers, Youth Cheer and the Special Olympics. 

No.  A stadium and restrooms would increase the overall tax rate.  The District is exploring other possible finance options, such as grants, before appealing to the community for additional tax dollars.  By completing the groundwork, track, and field the District will be better positioned to apply for grants to finance a stadium and expanded restrooms.   

Under the 2019 Clean Buildings Act (later expanded in 2022), Eatonville High School and Eatonville Middle School are required to meet minimum energy efficiency standards by 2026, or face significant annual financial penalties.  The District is monitoring for potential postponements of state deadlines.      

There are various ways to meet compliance requirements, in which the District has already made progress.  Solar panels were installed at EHS, which were more than 50% grant funded.  Energy consultations are pointing to LED lighting and HVAC replacements as the most efficient route to complete compliance. 

Additional state funding opportunities are expected to become available over the next couple of years through various legislative initiatives.  The strategy is to aggressively pursue these potential grants, in order to lower compliance costs and save levy funds for other outlined priorities.

It is expected that the District will recoup the funds that it does spend from energy savings over the next decade.