Seattle Schools and Capital Dollars - The Next BEX

 Last week SPS staff and the school board had a Work Session on the next capital levy which will be BEX VI. (It was followed by a session on the Board's committee structure. Spoiler alert - they believe they do NOT need the committees that they ended - Executive, Curriculum, Instruction and Student Services, and Operations - and so those committees will not be coming back. Starts on page 45.)

The BEX VI levy is scheduled for the ballot in February 2025.  The last BEX levy in 2022 was for $783M.

I know many of you might wonder why the district would be so interested in the next BEX levy - one big reason is because several years back, the district moved the costs for 85% of the Technology department's costs into BEX. I cannot imagine what would happen if a levy failed because then how would they finance a large and costly department? I thought this folly when it started and I still think so. 

The district also moved more than major maintenance to the capital levies; they moved a lot of basic maintenance. And yet for all that cost savings to the General Fund, they are STILL short. Hmmm.

Another issue to note is this:

Continued playground replacements and security improvement projects

Thanks to Director Leslie Harris who got tired of so many schools having to do their own fundraising to replace old and sometimes dangerous playground equipment. She got the rest of the Board to vote to include playground replacement in BEX levies. As well, the security needs have grown in SPS so there's that uptick in spending. 

You can see all this extra spending reflected on page 8 of the PowerPoint as you see desired amount for each BEX amount climb higher and higher, faster and faster. 

They claim this on page 9:

Goal is to completely modernize a building every 50 years (update all building systems, bring up to current code) 

When I moved, I got rid of many, many files I had on various SPS topics. I had one for BEX and I KNOW that the district had started saying they were building for 25-35 years, even though the standard had been 50 years. What has caused them to go back is unclear but, of course, if you are pandering for money, you can explain you need these vast sums because "we're building for a 50-year cycle."

Page 22 - Enrollment Projections and Levy Planning makes for interesting reading. 

Page 24 - This page has a low, middle and high scenario for enrollment forecasting.

Page 34 - Under Guiding Principles, there's this part:

prioritize compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Why start now? Why wasn't this a main goal from the get-go for Capital updates? It's a bit hypocritical to make the district look like they will actually do this.

Page 35 states:

When placing portables, evaluate the need for plumbed portables to allow students and staff access to water and restrooms.

No kidding.

I would like to know what the rest of that page means for on-the-ground actions:

Put the District in a position to easily and efficiently meet capacity and community needs while
supporting school community history and continuity with a focus on meeting the needs of students
furthest from educational justice. Ensure that changes are reflective of, representative of, and supportive of school community needs, history and culture, and that programs follow student needs (not the other way around).