2025 Legislative Priorities
Summary of Bellevue School District Legislative Priorities for 2025
One of the most significant issues facing Washington State school districts is the state’s funding methodology for both general education and special education. The Bellevue School District (BSD) is strongly advocating the legislature transform the current funding mechanisms for K-12 education (the prototypical school model). The per pupil funding provided by the state has dropped by 5.4% since 2018 and the percent of the state budget allocated to K-12 education is the lowest it has been since 2013/2014. The state does not fully fund basic education and caps funds available from local sources which restricts the ability to meet student needs and federal mandates.
Restructuring the funding mechanisms for K-12 education is complex and requires a defined process and multiple perspectives which will take several years. In the meantime, school districts are not receiving adequate funds and continue to reduce critical services needed by students.
To meet the short-term financial needs of districts, the BSD is proposing some changes for the legislature to consider that would impact all school districts across the state and provide the financial stability needed while the prototypical school funding system is being fixed.
Highest Priority Issues
1. Special Education Funding:
The special education funding shortfall has long been an issue. Districts throughout the state are using local levy dollars to supplement special education services to meet student needs. While the legislature has begun to add funding to special education over the past few years, it has not had a significant impact on the state-wide deficit. The BSD is proposing:
· Increase multipliers to Pre-K 1.3X, Tier I to 1.45X and Tier II to 1.3X which would add $6 million to the funding of special education for BSD. These multiplier increases would decrease the proportion of funding provided by BSD for special education services from 49.8% to 41.2%.
· Lower the per student safety net threshold to $30,000 to decrease the district’s dependency on local revenues to support students with special needs.
· When calculating the expenditures attributable to a student for safety net purposes, include benefits in addition an employee salary.
2. MSOC Funding:
Funding for Materials, Supplies and Operating Costs (MSOCs) has not kept pace with inflationary cost increases. In 2019/20 the MSOC allocation per student was $1,293. In 2024/2025 the MSOC allocation per student is $1,515 per student resulting in an increase of 17% over 5 years. The BSD proposal is:
· Split MSOCs expenditures into two categories – Operational costs and Materials and Supplies. Operation costs include utilities, insurances, fuel, food for student meals, insurance, etc. The cost of these items is market-driven and in recent years have been increasing at higher rates than general inflation.
3. Transportation:
Since its inception, the Student Transportation Allocation Reporting System (STARS) has not adequately funded transportation costs. The BSD is proposing:
· Reimburse districts for the transportation cost for students experiencing homelessness and increase the amount available to reimburse the transportation costs for students with special needs.
· Establish a formula that pays districts for 70% of the submitted travel costs for students with special needs. Currently, districts are reimbursed at an average rate of 38%.
Additional Issues
4. Benefit Funding and Premium Charges:
The state funds employee benefits on a full-time equivalent (FTE) basis while the State Employee Benefits Board (SEBB) collects the employer paid portion of benefit premiums based on district total headcount. The BSD proposal is to:
· Provide funding for state funded employees based on headcount as opposed to full time equivalent to ensure the district receives and pays equivalent funds for employee benefits.
Employees who work 630 hours per year (equivalent to 0.3 FTE) qualify for full benefits. This results in an annual SEBB gap of $9,424 for each employee that is borne by the district’s local funding even if the employee is funded by the state apportionment. The BSD proposal is to:
· Fund employee benefits based on headcount rather than FTE or raise the number of work hours required to qualify for full benefits, for example, to 0.5 FTE, which would reduce the maximum annual gap to $7,068 per employee.
SEBB charges district premiums for all employees who qualify for benefits even if employees are not taking the benefits and are not funded by the state apportionment model. Charging school districts based on qualifying employees as opposed to employees utilizing the benefits reduces the funds available to support student needs. The BSD proposal is to:
· Charge district premiums only for employees who have signed up for SEBB benefits.
5. Career and Technical Education (CTE) Funding:
CTE funding is provided for 7th through 12th grade students. Even though sixth graders have access to CTE course in the middle school model, district is forced to absorb this cost of sixth graders are permitted to take these courses. Some districts do not allow students to take any CTE courses until seventh grade even if they are available at the school they attend. The BSD proposal is to:
· Provide CTE funding for sixth – 12th grade students to allow all students in middle schools to take CTE classes with no financial penalty to the district.
6. Green Buildings Act:
Access to capital funds to maintain and modernize school facilities is highly dependent on local funding. Many of the school facilities in Washington state do not meet the health, safety, or educational needs of students. The Green Buildings Act fines building owners for non-compliance with energy consumption standards. Many school districts in the state will pay fines for every building. These fines must come from their general fund which is already strained by structural funding issues for K-12 education in Washington. The BSD is proposing:
· Provide the capital funding needed for school districts to upgrade their buildings to meet the standards of the Green Building Act
· Exclude school districts from compliance with the Green Building Act standards.
7. Enrollment Funding:
When enrollment drops for a district, the district loses funding immediately. The general apportionment received by the district are based on the average student FTE recalculated monthly throughout the school year. As enrollment declines, districts lose revenue faster than they can eliminate expenses. The BSD is proposing:
· Use either the current enrollment or a two or three-year average, whichever results in the greatest revenue for the district.
· Adopt an annual count day as the basis for calculating apportionment to eliminate revenue reductions throughout the school year.
8. Increase Local Enrichment Levy Limits and Local Effort Assistance (LEA) Funding:
LEA is the tool the state implemented to resolve the equity issue that results from using local funds to fund education. In 2018 when the McCleary solution was implemented, the amount the state spent on LEA funding was $482.7 million and 222 districts received this funding. Since then, the amount of LEA funding has dropped to $178.2 million and only 119 districts received this funding in 2023. The BSD is proposing:
· Increase the maximum LEA per student ($2,010) from 62% of the maximum local levy per student to 100% of the maximum local levy per pupil which would increase the maximum LEA per student to $3,247. Raising the LEA maximum to this number would bring districts that have lost their LEA back into LEA funding status and continue to support equity of funding between property rich and property poor districts.
· Increase the maximum local levy per student to $4,000 per student and the maximum LEA per student to $4,000. districts towards a more adequate funding level. In addition, the impact of the higher funding would be shared with the state for property poor districts that have difficulty passing local levies and the local taxpayers for property rich districts.
· Amend RCW 84.52.0531 to apply the same regionalization factor used on state apportionment to local enrichment levy allowable collections, so that our local levy dollars have the same buying power as the funds received from the state.
9. Early Childhood Education (Preschool):
Children who attend an early learning program have high literacy numeracy, language fluency skills and develop critical social emotional skills necessary for empathy and self-regulation. Access to early learning programs for low-income families reduces disparities in academic and social emotional outcomes for students entering kindergarten. The BSD proposal is:
· Develop legislation that expands access and provides funding for quality early learning programs for all families.