Mountain View plans to try another levy soon

Less than two weeks after Idaho County voters turned down Mountain View School District’s proposed one-year, $3.1 million supplemental levy, trustees have decided to give it another try.

With only 40.7 percent of votes in favor of the measure, its rejection May 18 came as an unpleasant surprise for most, but not all, officials at the school district, some of whom attribute its failure to rampant “misinformation.”

The proposal sought $800,000 less than its previous levy, which also failed, and would have supported the general operation and maintenance of school district buildings and activities for one year.

“There was a lot of misinformation out there that once again has confused our communities,” said Superintendent Todd Fiske, whose district includes the towns of Grangeville, Elk City and Kooskia. “Information that conflicted with the work I was trying to do to help educate people around what the levy represented and what the levy represents for us every year.”

The proposed measure would’ve accounted for around 30 percent of the school district’s budget. The remaining 70 percent comes from state and federal funds. Hoping to circumvent another large deficit in funding for the second consecutive year, officials are planning to run another, smaller levy in August to the tune of $2.2 million.

Without it, the school district will need to make severe cuts. The school board is currently scrambling to outline a budget, which they’ll submit to the state before elections this summer. Some programs will have to be cut, regardless of whether the newly proposed levy passes in August.

To make up the difference in funding from the state while continuing to run the school district at an appropriate level, according to Fiske, a large portion is left to local control.

“You’re having to basically run a 25-30 percent general fund levy amount each year,” Fiske said. “The voter gets pretty fatigued that you have to come to them every year.”

The last time a levy failed, in June 2020, the school district lost multiple teaching positions that have remained unfilled. The most recent failure before that occurred in 2007.

Last September, a history teaching position went unfilled because of cuts. Instead of finding a replacement the school district couldn’t afford, a substitute teacher filled the position for the remainder of the year.

There was also “a number of resignations,” according to Fiske, occurring in part because of the failed levy. As the school district navigated a financial emergency, board members decided to cut 70 percent of dependent care from employee health benefits.

One of many jobs that’s remained unfilled because of the cuts is an art teaching position. Another is for a school psychiatrist.

“We’ve had to fill it with online work,” Fiske said. “We transitioned to doing a lot of things via Zoom with a company that offers a school psychiatrist and is able to help fulfill those services.”

According to Fiske, board member Casey Smith was an “integral part” of trying to bring the levy down. Smith paid for two advertisements in the Grangeville newspaper, the Idaho County Free Press, that urged voters to oppose the measure. The other five members of the school board have continued to support its levies.

“What happened is people are just saying no,” Smith said. “People are tired of having to pay for years and years and the amount continues to go up.”

Board member Pam Reidlen said while she’s disappointed the levy didn’t pass, she’s seen the frustrations people experience when assessments go up on their property.

“We kind of all agree that the state needs a different way to fund education,” Reidlen said. “It’s all put on the property owner, and people get pretty tired of that.”

While other funding mechanisms will continue to play themselves out, including appropriations from the U.S. Forest Service and COVID-19 relief bills, the school district routinely falls short of funding to simply keep operations going.

Idaho’s rural counties, particularly those with a high percentage of national forests, receive critical funding from the federal government to supplement infrastructure and education costs. However, these Secure Rural Schools payments aren’t guaranteed.

“Forest funds are not a given every particular year,” Fiske said. “It’s reauthorized in October, so we don’t even know what next year holds.”

In the meantime, the school board is workshopping its next budget. While members haven’t yet discussed what programs to cut, Reidlen says they’ll have to make those decisions soon.

“Right now, we have to cut $2 million from our proposed budget,” Reidlen said.

Palermo may be contacted at apalermo@lmtribune.com. Follow her on Twitter @apalermotweets.