Kalispell voters to decide elementary levy
Taxpayers in Kalispell Public Schools’ elementary district can expect to see a levy request on their ballots in May.
At a special meeting on Tuesday, the elementary school board agreed to ask voters for a $338,000 levy to help alleviate the $603,000 deficit the district faces in its 2010-2011 elementary budget.
If voters approve the levy request, annual property taxes on a home with a $100,000 taxable value will go up about $19.16. Taxes on a home with a $200,000 taxable value will go up about $38.32 a year.
In addition to the levy, the school district will make a minimum of about $265,000 in cuts from the elementary budget.
At their last regular meeting, trustees had considered asking voters for a $250,000 levy. The difference in taxes between that and the $338,000 levy is about $5 for a house with a taxable value of $100,000.
“I think if you can pass a $250,000 levy, you can pass a $338,000 levy,” trustee Eve Dixon said. “It’s a big ‘if’ on the first one, but I think if you can pass the first one, you can pass the second one.”
Vice chairwoman Mary Ruby, who conducted the meeting in chairwoman Anna Marie Bailey’s absence, agreed with Dixon.
“I have to say I’m with Eve. I don’t have a problem going out and asking for that much money,” Ruby said.
Trustees decided earlier this month not to ask voters to approve a high school levy. Instead the district will make reductions totaling at least about $135,300.
If the district uses $81,000 in program retention money, the total high school deficit could be made up. But trustees are divided about spending the money, which essentially is a savings account the district can tap into when needed.
Some trustees think the district should save those funds to help assuage 2011-2012’s anticipated $2 million shortfall. Other trustees support spending the funds in 2010-2011, especially if it means saving jobs.
Trustee Don Murray said having a savings account isn’t fair to students who are in the school system now. Not spending the money deprives current students of programs, he said.
“Saving money for a rainy day in our business doesn’t get us anywhere, and it hurts the kids that we have right now,” he said.
Trustees Alice Ritzman and Tom Clark had a different perspective. Earlier this month they supported making deeper budget cuts next year to reduce the number of reductions the district will have to make the following year.
“I am totally against using retention funds” to reduce the 2010-2011 deficit, Ritzman said.
Clark agreed. “It’s not how I would run a business,” he said. “I don’t think we’re adequately preparing for next year.”
Some trustees agreed but said they could support using transition funds next year under certain circumstances.
“I would rather use them than dig into personnel,” Ivan Lorentzen said.
Rick Davis echoed that opinion, but said he was uncomfortable using retention funds for any other reason. He asked administrators to look at the budget again and see if there are ways to make cuts without laying off staff.
“I think we can look a little harder,” Clark agreed. “If it comes down to it, I’ll use the retention funds, because I agree with Rick — I don’t want to cut staff.”
Reporter Kristi Albertson may be reached at 758-4438 or by e-mail at kalbertson@dailyinterlake.com