The Nampa School District next month will ask voters to authorize a $33.6 million, two-year supplemental levy funding employee salaries, curriculum and technology. That’s what the ballot will say, anyway. 

What the ballot won’t say is that the district would actually collect just $12 million from the levy — a little more than one-third of the listing price. The other 64% would be covered by the School District Facilities Fund, a tax relief endowment created by House Bill 292 that gives public schools state money every year to offset locally supported school bonds and levies. 

It’s a discount that has the potential to sway voters who are on the fence about supporting one of the highest-priced ballot measures in the state this election cycle. But districts aren’t allowed to mention the state tax relief in official ballot language, so Nampa leaders are hoping to spread the word before voters head to the polls.

“It’s like having a sales price but not being able to advertise the sales price,” Nampa Superintendent Gregg Russell told reporters last week.

Nampa isn’t the only district touting the state savings. In local news outlets and on social media, public school leaders across Idaho are promising that ballot measures will be cheaper than advertised. Altogether, districts are asking for $159 million in bonds and levies, which would cover everything from a new auditorium in Fremont County to teacher salaries in Kendrick and school lunches in Weiser.

The Gooding School District says its $31.5 million bond proposal — which would fund major renovations at the elementary/middle and high schools — will actually cost $26.4 million, thanks to HB 292. And Minidoka Superintendent Spencer Larson told KIVI that his district’s local tax rate would go down if voters approve a $7.7 million, two-year supplemental levy.

But there’s a reason the Legislature passed a law prohibiting districts from mentioning state tax relief on ballots. The HB 292 money technically isn’t assured. Lawmakers could repeal the School District Facilities Fund — although that seems unlikely, since they just added $50 million to it this year. And the fund depends on state revenues, which have lagged behind projections in recent months, raising concerns about a potential year-end deficit.

“While the school districts may be saying something factual, there’s no guarantees to those things,” said Rep. Lance Clow, a Republican from Twin Falls and member of the House Education Committee. “If those revenues come in lower that means we’re going to give lower tax relief.” 

Enacted by the Legislature two years ago, HB 292 pooled a few state revenue streams into the School District Facilities Fund, including: 

• State lottery revenue,
• 3.25% of state sales tax revenue, and 
• 20% of the state’s Tax Relief Fund, plus $50 million. 

The fund produced $235 million this fiscal year, and the money will offset bonds and levies that local taxpayers would otherwise cover, said Gideon Tolman, chief financial officer at the Idaho Department of Education (IDE).

IDE administers the School District Facilities Fund through an attendance-based formula, and the total went up this year. The Nampa School District received $10.8 million, about $4 million more than last year. 

But the dollar amount will vary from district to district, year to year, Tolman said. “As with other funding measures, changes in attendance, state revenues or legislative action could affect how those savings play out over time.”

Tolman also noted that HB 292 was designed to reduce school districts’ reliance on bonds and levies. It wasn’t meant to make future ballot measures an easier sell. 

That’s why Republican lawmakers passed House Bill 574 last year. The law prohibits ballot language from including “any information” about state tax relief funds, “unless a specific dollar amount of such funds is guaranteed to the taxing district.”

“This is all about transparency and making sure that people are aware of what they’re voting for,” former Rep. Kevin Andrus, a Republican from Lava Hot Springs who sponsored the bill, said at the time. 

Districts probably will continue to get the state tax relief in the coming years. Still, promising voters that they’ll pay less on bonds and levies is a small gamble — one that not all school leaders are willing to take. 

Jim Foudy, superintendent of the Blaine County School District, isn’t telling voters that the district’s share of School District Facilities funds likely would cover most of its $7.7 million supplemental levy request. Blaine County won’t know until next August exactly how much it’ll get through HB 292, Foudy said. 

“It takes a long time to earn public trust, and it takes a minute to lose it,” he said. “We’re going to underpromise, overdeliver.”

But Nampa has more to lose. If its levy fails, the district will have to eliminate 45 to 55 jobs — two or three per school — and 288 families would lose funding for preschool, Russell said. Teachers also would lose access to updated digital curriculum, and students might have to pay fees for sports and activities.

The district will get School District Facilities funds regardless of the levy election outcome. These state funds are tightly controlled, however. According to HB 292, if a district doesn’t have a bond or levy on the books, it can only spend the money on facilities upgrades or maintenance, ruling out most of the expenses that Nampa’s levy would cover. 

“It would not be allowed anymore for people, for curriculum, for security, for safety components, (things) that are really critical for everyday operations,” said Assistant Superintendent Waylon Yarbrough.

Nampa administrators say they’re confident future School District Facilities fund distributions will be comparable to the $10.8 million they received this year. If they’re right, the new $33.6 million supplemental levy proposal will cost less than the district’s current $29.4 million levy. 

“That’s the clarity we need the voters to understand, because the ballot language doesn’t allow us to do that,” said Cortney Stauffer, Nampa’s assistant superintendent for operations. “And we really need to make sure that people are clear…that we are not asking for more than what we need to run the district.”

Election day is Nov. 4.