After months of financial strain and two failed levy attempts earlier this year, Battle Ground Public Schools leaders signaled support for a levy option and a February 2026 ballot measure.
The district’s current 2025-26 school year budget includes $14 million in cuts to staffing and programs, following voters' rejection of the district’s replacement levy earlier this year. Should a new levy pass next year, the district would not be able to tap into the funds until the 2027-28 school year. Superintendent Shelly Whitten told the school board during a Monday, Nov. 10 work session that the district has reached a critical point.
“We know that this is a two-year problem,” Whitten said, noting the lack of a levy will continue into two additional school years if not passed. “If we can’t get this next levy try across the finish line, this will be a much longer problem for us, and we will be cutting more than $20 million as we go into this spring.”
She explained that, even with deep reductions this year, the district has identified only about $12 million in potential cuts, far short of the $20 million needed if a levy fails again.
“There are things on our list that I’m not sure that I can guarantee safe and secure buildings,” Whitten said. “I’m very worried about our district moving forward without passing a levy.”
Cuts this year eliminated all middle school sports and coaching positions, free school supplies for primary students, the Kindergarten Jump Start program, instructional coaches and teacher librarians. The district also reduced crossing guard, nursing and mental health staff, consolidated bus routes and delayed new curriculum purchases. The ASPIRE magnet program was scaled back, cutting its third-grade cohort.
The current levy, which expires in December, collects about $2.14 per $1,000 in assessed property value. That amount will drop to roughly $0.45 next year, unless voters approve a replacement, which would be the lowest in the county. The second-lowest school district collection is Green Mountain School District’s $2.25 per $1,000.
The board reviewed two options. Option A would collect $1.90 per $1,000, generating approximately $41 million in 2027, while maintaining current operations but not restoring lost staff or programs. Option B would collect $1.99 per $1,000, raising about $43 million and restoring some programs and positions. As property values rise, the district would collect approximately $49.5 million from Option A and $51.9 million from Option B by 2030, the year both options are set to expire. District officials have not recommended raising property taxes to $2.50 per $1,000 in assessed property value, the maximum allowed by the State.
Option A would maintain operations, but Whitten warned it may not cover rising costs such as a $20,000 water rate increase, $2 million more in transportation benefits, and $250,000 in new sales tax requirements, meaning some programs could still face cuts. Option B would enable the district to reinstate some school programs with the additional $2 million.
“I hesitate to say all (staff and programs),” Whitten said. “We need to make sure that we have enough money to sustain that, rather than start and promise our community that we could go back to a full middle school (sports) plan like we had.”
Student representatives also spoke in favor of Option B, citing the importance of preserving middle school sports and other extracurricular opportunities.
“All these student programs affect so many things; absences, grades, even how students feel about school,” Student Representative Itzel Contreras Montiel said. “Why would they stay in our district if they’re still not having those opportunities?”
As the district has two opportunities to pass a levy next year, board members appeared divided on whether to aim for a February or April ballot. Most administrators and board members favored putting a resolution forward in February, citing historically higher passage rates earlier in the year. The district also faces a deadline to prepare for $20 million in program and staffing cuts for the next school year by April if the levy fails.
Board Director Terry Tate suggested the district delay until April to give voters more time to engage and learn about the levy.
“I feel like, to set this thing up for success, we would be in a much stronger position if we start bringing the community in to talk with us at meetings,” Tate said. “So my point is that we don't necessarily communicate as well as we should about things, and I think we can do better. I think we can get people to meetings. I think we can get people to talk and ask questions.”
Most members, however, preferred to move ahead in February.
“Three of our board members will be stepping aside, and that will be a decision for the incoming board members,” Whitten said. “But I can’t bear the thought of failing again.”
During public comment, two upcoming school board directors shared support for Whitten’s recommendation. Marshall Marrott, the incoming director for District 5, said a February ballot would give voters time to absorb potential cuts and allow a possible second attempt in the fall if needed.
“That way, we’re not doing all the work in the background,” Marrott said. “We can plan things for good or for bad afterwards. Then, if we need to do a secondary, the fall is a great idea.
Following the meeting, Marrott said he hopes voters recognize the consequences of another failed levy.
“I don't think that's in the best interest of students or student success,” he said. “I'm hopeful that the levy will pass because we've already seen significant changes over the past year, and I would hate to see more changes be placed to burden students.”
Lorri Sibley, director-elect for District 1, also backed the February vote, noting it would come before tax season.
In a later interview, Sibley said she would support Option B.
“Option [A] didn’t give us what we need to offer the programs that I feel kids need to have,” Sibley said. “We need to ask for what we need.”
She pointed to the district’s record of accountability.
“Battle Ground’s always asked for what it needs, not more,” she said. “We’ve had 14 years of clean audits. Every single budget item is evaluated, and the district has always been careful with its dollars.”
The district will have until Dec. 12 to submit ballot resolutions to Clark County ahead of a February vote.
