Didn’t we just vote? And you’re telling us we have to vote again?
Welcome to municipal elections, and yes, there’s another election and it’s coming up very fast. On February 13 residents all across Spokane County will be voting on whether to continue funding lots of pretty important — some might say foundational! — public services. Schools. Libraries. Fire stations and the people who work in them.
There are so many different little elections, y’all, we decided to split our explainers in two: Spokane and everything except Spokane.
Here we are going to dig into four ballot measures for people who live in 1) Spokane city limits and 2) the district footprint of Spokane Public Schools, which is almost the same, but not quite!
Doesn’t make much sense, but if municipal politics and bureaucracy made sense, then you wouldn’t need us!
So check out our breakdown below. If you live in Medical Lake or just want to geek out on proposed school levy rates across a dozen odd smaller school districts, check out our county explainer tomorrow.
Measure 1 - The Library Levy
The item at the top of ballots for those residing inside city limits is Measure 1, which is a renewal of the existing levy, which currently makes up about 18% of the Spokane Public Library’s budget and expires at the end of 2024. This ballot measure only requires a simple majority to pass.
If passed, Measure 1 would “replace” the expiring existing levy, funding the library from 2025 through the end of 2027 at a property tax rate of 7 cents per thousand dollars of assessed value for a levy rate not to exceed $3.60, which is the same as it’s been for the last three years.
The ballot measure uses language like “replace and increase,” which can be a little confusing. The bottom line, though, is this: the 7 cent rate is the same it has been since 2013. Your property value, if you own property, has likely gone up since then, so you might be paying more, but not because the tax is higher — because your property is worth more.
Let’s use the median sale price from the end of 2022 and 2023 to illustrate the difference. According to Redfin, The average Spokane sale price for a home in December 2022 was $330,000. In December 2023, it had increased just a little, to $337,000. If we pretend those statistics were an actual home, the homeowners would have paid $23.10 toward the library in 2022 and $23.59 in 2023, a difference of less than $.50 for the whole year.
Most streaming services raised their rates last October between $1 and $3 per month. If you didn’t notice that increase, you probably won’t notice this one.
Because home values are going up a little bit, though, the city anticipates collecting slightly more money each year as property values rise. The city anticipates collecting $2.5 million from this tax in 2025, about $2,525,000 in 2026 and about $2,550,250 in 2027.
While the library hasn’t given specifics as to what programs or amenities would be cut if the levy fails, we should expect losing 18% of your budget overnight would lead to a significant drop in services.
Spokane City Council members expressed worries at Monday’s council meeting that staffing costs and weekend library hours could be the first things to go. At that meeting, city council members heard public testimony on whether or not the council should approve a resolution showing the city’s official support for Measure 1 — a move that does nothing substantive legislation-wise, but expresses the importance of the levy to voters as they consider whether or not to support the continuation of the tax funding the libraries.
There was no “against” statement provided in time to include in the voter’s guide, but three citizens spoke against the council’s support of the library levy, including Justin Haller, the infamous “hot pizza” guy.
“I’m against any waste of our public resources that we have to pay back through taxation,” Haller said. “Instead, we should just have a book burning party for the book Fahrenheit 451 and the book 1984, because apparently [the council] is using them as examples, not warnings.”
Dennis Flynn and Dave Miller — or Dave M. as he signed up for city council testimony — both pointed more toward a need for austerity and better budget management as the reason they were against the ballot measure.
Council Member Jonathan Bingle also did not support the ballot measure, stating that while he and his family enjoy the Shadle Park branch, he is frustrated that the libraries have been operating as “de facto shelters for the homeless.”
“While we want beautiful libraries, we want libraries that serve the people as libraries,” Bingle said. “Until there’s a separation of those and we have homeless services in the spaces where we should be having homeless services, I won’t be supporting this.”
The libraries were listed as part of the city’s emergency warming shelter plan as options for folks to utilize during daytime hours. The warming shelter plan does support plenty of unhoused people, but it’s also a place for seniors and the working poor to escape extreme cold and extreme heat during emergencies.
Other council members chimed in to show their support for the measure and their appreciation for the libraries.
Freshman Council Member Kitty Klitzke said the last time she had visited the Shadle Park Library, the parking lot was full. When she went inside, she saw people who, like her, were there to check out and return books, but she also saw folks using warming services, a child’s birthday party hosted in one of the meeting rooms and classes being taught in another conference room.
“Libraries are more than just books,” Klitzke said. “It’s true they’ve become kind of community centers, but I think that’s a good thing.”
Ultimately, the council voted 6-1 to support the ballot measure, with Bingle the lone “no” vote.
“What would happen if this did not pass is, quite frankly, scary — going back to where things were 10 years ago where we had reduced hours, we were short-staffed,” said Paul Dillon, one of the other freshman council members. “This is really important for the community.”
Measure 2 - City Charter amendment on redistricting
The second ballot measure is unique, because it is the lone city proposal that isn’t about taxation. Instead City Council is asking the public if it wants to amend the City Charter to change the way the city handles the redistricting process.
As it currently stands, the process of redistricting — which happens every 10 years after US Census data is published — begins with the mayor’s office appointing three volunteers, who are subsequently approved by the city council, to draw new maps that seek to ensure each of the three districts has about the same number of people in it. The city council then looks at the submitted drafts and approves one.
Last year, though, after volunteer members drew more than a dozen draft maps, the city council instead voted to approve a map drawn by Council Member Zack Zappone, who was serving as an advisory member to the three volunteers. Zappone’s stated goal was to avoid splitting up neighborhoods, as they have aligned interests. His map didn’t split up neighborhoods, but it also functionally gave liberals an advantage in Zappone’s District 3, and made District 1, which is currently represented by Bingle and Michael Cathcart, two conservatives, a little bit more blue as well.
Following the controversy around the last round of redistricting, Cathcart submitted a proposal for a ballot measure that, if passed, would limit the city council’s ability to draw their own district maps. The council was poised for a split vote on Cathcart’s original proposal, which Zappone and Dillon argued hadn’t seen enough community discussion or input from stakeholder groups. Karen Stratton, who was sitting on the council at the time, encouraged the council to work down to the wire to collaborate on a measure that they could unanimously support. Those last minute edits in December led to the language currently on the ballot, which was passed with the support of the full council.
If passed by voters, Measure 2 would change the redistricting process outlined in the City Charter, which is slated to happen after the 2030 US Census, in a few ways.
It would expand the commission drawing the maps from three people to seven — one person from each district would be appointed by the mayor, and an additional three by the city council — with the mayor and the council “aiming for geographic and demographic diversity, including racial, ethnic, gender, political, and experiential backgrounds,” in their choices, according to the Washington State Voters Guide.
It would also institute a longer cooling off period before lobbyists, candidates or campaign-involved people could be nominated to the commission
Those six people would then work together to appoint the seventh member, who would hold a nonvoting spot as committee chair. It would also codify prioritizing keeping neighborhoods together during future redistricting efforts, and lower the bar for citizens to request redistricting before the ten year mark from 15% of registered voters to 10%.
Perhaps most importantly, Measure 2 would bar city council from drawing their own maps. City council will still hold the power to approve or reject maps submitted by the redistricting commission, and if no map is approved by a super-majority, they will default to retaining the old maps.
The measure also removes the advisory roles city council members used to play on the redistricting committee.
On Monday, city council voted through a resolution of support for the measure, encouraging the public to vote it through. Zappone, who has been something of a lightning rod at the center of the redistricting controversy that sparked this measure, voiced his support for it, saying he hoped the vote would draw the attention of the media.
“The media hasn’t been covering this,” Zappone said. “I think that this resolution is a way to get the attention of the media to educate the public on an important issue.”
Cathcart, who had been the first of the evening to call for more media attention to the ballot measure, wanted more public education on the measure, but less influence from the city council.
“I didn’t ask for this endorsement to be on the agenda,” said Cathcart, who was the single “no” vote in support of his own measure. “I don’t think we should continue to put our thumb on the scale on redistricting matters and so I’m not supporting the endorsement of, frankly, my own measure, because I think that we should let the voters decide.”
In an interview with RANGE, Cathcart shared his personal feelings of support for the measure.
“One of the things I’m really passionate about is government reform and reforming things that don’t work,” Cathcart said. “We've had some controversies and this is a great way to fix it. It's supported across the board from council members with different perspectives, backgrounds and politics. We’re all getting behind this saying ‘Yes, we need to reform this.’ I strongly, overwhelmingly endorse and support this passing at the ballot.”
The argument “for” the measure in the Washington State Voters Guide was jointly prepared by Cathcart and Zappone, and no one signed up to present an “against” case.
“Although we come from different ends of the political spectrum, we are united in our support for this amendment,” Cathcart and Zappone wrote. “Voting yes on this amendment is a step towards establishing a redistricting process rooted in fairness, inclusivity, and transparency. This approach ensures more meaningful engagement with the community, while fostering deeper trust and an outcome that better reflects Spokane's values and alignments.”
Proposition 1 - Spokane School District levy
Spokane School District’s existing levy expires at the end of 2024, and Proposition 1 is a replacement levy seeking to maintain the current tax rate through the end of 2027. The tax would keep the existing $2.50 for every $1,000 of assessed property value. For an average home in Spokane — using the 2023 median home sold price of $337,000 — that would equate to about $842.50 per year.
Funds collected from the levy make up about 14% of the district’s annual operating budget. School levies usually pass, but there have been increasing efforts by the far right to convince people to vote against, and when they fail, it can be devastating. In 2023, a failed levy in North Idaho’s West Bonner School district threatened to cut all school sports and extracurricular activities. The district even briefly considered closing its middle school.
The levy requires only a simple majority to pass, and funds collected would would go towards “educational programs and operation expenses not funded by the State (including class size, advanced courses, special education, nurses, counselors, technology support, safety staff, music, athletics, and extracurricular activities)” according to the Washington State Voters Guide.
While the Spokane City Council had originally intended to put forth a resolution in support of both the levy and the bond, that agenda item was deferred indefinitely.
In the Voters Guide, the “for” statement was provided by members of the group Yes for Spokane Schools: Kris Jeske, Tim Kestell & Megan Read.
“Education grows economies. Strong schools benefit Spokane. Levy funding is essential to the strength of a collaborative learning environment,” they wrote. “As parents and leaders in the community, we ask you to vote ‘Yes’ to support education and engagement for all Spokane Public Schools’ students.”
The “against” statement was written by Natalie Poulson, a failed legislative candidate and former teacher fired for refusing to follow the mask mandate who also appeared onstage with Matt Shea at the Sean Feucht concert, and Ericka Lalka, who ran for school board this year and lost. They referenced the fact that despite the tax rate staying the same, rising property values would amount to higher dollar amounts paid.
“Even a slight increase, multiplied by skyrocketing assessed property values, equals huge tax increases, paid for by property owners and renters in their rents,” Poulson and Lalka wrote. “62% of your property taxes currently go to schools. That is enough!”
Though the ballot measure does not list teacher salaries as something the levy funds will be spent on, Poulson and Lalka also criticized teacher salaries.
“District unions and administrators, in closed meetings, ‘bargained’ away future multiyear taxpayer money without input from taxpayers or legislators,” they wrote. “Their compensations are scheduled to continue to increase at faster than inflation rates and now they want local taxpayers to pay the bill.”
In a rebuttal, the Yes for Spokane Schools group wrote, “SPS has historically been under budget and bargaining agreements are transparently posted on the SPS website. This levy fills critical gaps in state funding that support all public education students.”
Proposition 2 - Spokane School District bond
In addition to the replacement levy covered in Proposition 1, the Spokane School District also has a bond on the ballot to raise money for construction projects and other facility improvements. Proposition 2 would collect a new tax of $.02 per $1,000 of assessed home value — or about $6.74 dollars on the $337,000 value of our theoretical average home — but would cap the total at $200,000,000. If approved the district has said it will undertake a raft of projects, including:
- Replacing Adams and Madison Elementary Schools.
- Modernizing and expanding the oldest sections of Garry Middle School and North Central High School.
- Improving Chase Middle School, The Community School, Spokane Public Montessori and Libby Center for program growth.
- Designing replacements for Balboa and Indian Trail Elementary Schools
- Acquiring land
- Making District-wide safety, technology and smaller capital improvements
Because of state law, bonds require an approval of 60% of the voters — with a 40% minimum voter turnout — to pass.
The same groups as for the levy — Yes for Spokane Schools and Poulson and Lalka — provided the “for” and “against” statements.
“Spokane Public Schools has an outstanding track record of meeting the needs of our growing community by completing school construction projects on time and on budget,” the Yes for Spokane Schools folks wrote. “This bond dollar amount has been significantly reduced from the previous 2018 bond to sustain stable tax bills and in consideration of the impact of increased property values on taxpayers.”
They also cited the nearly $40 million in matching funds the state of Washington had committed to the projects, if the bond passed.
Poulson and Lalka said statements from the district “fail to mention or account for skyrocketing assessed values which have increased much faster than rates have decreased,” and criticized the burden on landlords that gets passed on to renters, “since landlords often increase rents to cover a rise in property taxes.”
Jeske, Kestell and Read, the Yes for Spokane Schools folks, submitted a rebuttal that finished by reminding voters that the district has 57 schools to maintain.
“SPS has a predictable, consistent, and transparent long-range plan that addresses critical facility needs and keeps tax bills stable. Some schools are up to 100 years old and must be updated or replaced to keep our schools safe and efficient for learning.”
