Vashon Island educators say special-education funding gap forces levy reliance; safety-net reimbursements limited

District presenters and Superintendent Fred McShi used a community forum to explain how special-education funding shortfalls are driving local levy dependence and shaping advocacy work.

A slide comparing 2022–23 and 2023–24 special-education figures shows a year-over-year shortfall the presenter described as "about $400,000." Staff explained the state's safety-net reimbursement can offset costs only when a student's services exceed a 35% threshold above what the state provides; the district reported receiving roughly $175,000 back in prior years and had applied for about $190,000 this year. The safety-net process requires an application for each eligible student and involves a state review panel, staff said.

McShi said the prototypical funding model the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) uses to calculate staffing and allocations underfunds counselors, librarians and specialized staff at small districts: "To get a full-time librarian you need 603 students; counselors are funded at 811 students; school psychologists at the elementary level are funded at 23,000 students," he said, using the prototypical ratios to illustrate inadequacy for a small island district.

Because the state formula ties many positions to high enrollment thresholds, the district relies on local levies and partnerships to sustain services. McShi and parents discussed local partnerships, including a Willoughby Foundation gift that funds tutoring through the schools' foundation, and potential hospital-district case-management funding for behavioral health supports.

McShi said regional superintendents have placed special education at the top of their legislative platforms and that some leaders are discussing stronger measures, including legal action, to compel adequate funding. He referenced the McCleary litigation as an historical example of districts using court challenges to press the state on funding for basic education. No formal legal action was proposed at the meeting; discussions were framed as part of broader advocacy planning.

District staff emphasized the constraints of qualifying for many grants (which favor higher-poverty districts) and the administrative burden of safety-net applications, but urged community partnerships and continued legislative pressure as strategies to reduce levy dependence.

The forum did not include votes or formal board directives on litigation or new programs; the discussion was framed for parent information and to solicit community ideas for partnerships and advocacy.