HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 1575

BYRepresentatives H. Sommers, Brough, Wang, Ebersole, Miller, Holland, Silver, Peery, Appelwick, Schoon, Winsley, Ferguson, Jacobsen and Phillips.

Modifying school district funding.

House Committe on Education

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendments.  (12)

      Signed by Representatives Peery, Chair; G. Fisher, Vice Chair; Betrozoff, Ranking Republican Member; Cole, Dorn, Holland, Jones, Phillips, Rasmussen, Rayburn, Valle and K. Wilson.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (5)

      Signed by Representatives Brumsickle, Fuhrman, Horn, Schoon and Walker.

House Staff:Susan Patrick (786-7111)

Rereferred House Committee on Revenue

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (11)

      Signed by Representatives Wang, Chair; Pruitt, Vice Chair; Holland, Ranking Republican Member; Basich, Fraser, Grant, Morris, Phillips, Rust, Silver and H. Sommers.

Minority Report:  Without recommendation.  (4)

      Signed by Representatives Appelwick, Brumsickle, Haugen and Van Luven.

House Staff:      Rick Wickman and Bob Longman (786-7136)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON REVENUE MARCH 4, 1989

BACKGROUND:

Currently, a school district may collect an excess levy of up to 20 percent and for grandfather districts up to 30 percent.  Levies may be set for a two year period but must be approved by the voters every time.

SUMMARY:

BILL AS AMENDED:  School districts are authorized to impose a permanent levy of up to ten percent (one-half of the existing twenty percent district levy base) upon approval of a majority of the voters in the school district.  The levy would stay in place for the duration of time as authorized by the voters.

The school district may request voters to: a) limit the period of time for which the levy is made; b) limit the purpose of the levy; c) set a levy rate less than the maximum levy allowed; or any combination of the above.

A referenda process is established for the proposed school district levy option. A levy, approved by a simple majority of the voters could be modified if the voters, of the district obtain signatures on a referendum of at least fifteen percent of the registered voters within a thirty day period of time.  Under a referendum process, the voters could force a reduction or elimination of the levy rate option.

Sufficient signatures must be submitted to a county auditor to verify the fifteen percent registered voter requirement for a referendum.  Individuals seeking a referendum must submit a request to the county auditor.  Within ten days of the request, the county auditor must approve an official ballot title.  The referendum requestors must then begin collecting signatures to meet the requirements of a referendum.

The proposed levy option for local school districts shall take effect January 1, 1990, if the proposed amendment to Article VII, section 2 of the state constitution is approved by the public at the general election held November of 1989.

AMENDED BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  A referendum requirement was added for voters to repeal or reduce the new levy.

CHANGES PROPOSED BY COMMITTEE ON REVENUE:  A super-majority vote (60 percent/40 percent) as required for all excess levies was added for school districts to gain voter approval of the new levy.

Revenue:    The bill has a revenue impact.

Fiscal Note:      Available.

Effective Date:The bill takes effect on January 1, 1990, contingent on passage of HJR 4210.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    (Education) Representative Helen Sommers; Kris Van Gorkom, Washington Association of School Administrators; Dwayne Slate, Washington State School Directors' Association; Bob Maier, Washington Education Association; Perry Keithley, Superintendent of Public Instruction.

(Revenue) None Presented.

House Committee - Testified Against:      (Education) Paul Locke, Citizen.

(Revenue) None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (Education) The impact of adopting a permanent 10 percent levy is to provide stability. Although school districts have been very successful in passing levies, levy failure will occur.  The permanent levy will avoid the chaos of levy failure.  Flexibility is still available for districts which wish to use their levy capacity above 10 percent.

(Revenue) None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (Education) Any permanent levy should be opposed.  The real aim should be to get rid of levies not make them permanent.

(Revenue) None Presented.