Labels are based on a detector's reading of the text and are not a claim about the author.
The statements in this pamphlet are printed exactly as submitted. No spelling, grammatical, or other corrections have been made.
Statement For · Yelm Kids First
statement likely AI Committee: Judson Willis, Debbie Edwards, & Kathryn Cullum
A yes vote protects the programs, people, and opportunities that help Yelm students succeed.
Yelm Community Schools has faced significant financial challenges after multiple levy failures and ongoing funding shortfalls. As a result, the district has already made difficult cuts to staffing, programs, athletics, and student opportunities. This levy is essential to help maintain the programs and services students need to learn, grow, graduate, and prepare for their futures.
The state does not fully fund many of the services our community expects from its schools. Levy funding helps support classroom teachers, paraeducators, counselors, nurses, social workers, safety staff, technology, curriculum materials, athletics, extracurricular activities, graduation and career readiness, and other essential services.
Passing Proposition No. 1 will provide critical local funding to help restore stability, maintain important programs and services, and preserve opportunities for students both inside and outside the classroom. Strong schools benefit the entire community by helping prepare students for college, careers, the military, and life beyond high school. Please vote yes on Proposition No. 1.
Rebuttal of argument against
Washington’s school funding system is flawed, and Olympia should be held accountable. But rejecting this levy will not fix that failure. The reality is simple: not every essential part of a quality education is funded by the state. Levy dollars pay for real needs in our schools. When levies fail, the burden falls on Yelm’s students, educators, and families. Programs are cut, opportunities disappear, classrooms lose support, and our community pays the price. Vote yes.
Statement Against · Martin Miller & Frank Vance
statement likely AI Committee: Martin Miller & Frank Vance
Four times Yelm voters have said No. Instead of addressing that message, YCS is asking again for more money while restoring none of the programs already cut. The board acknowledges this levy maintains the current reductions. Asking citizens to pay more for less is not the change voters demanded.
Accountability must come before another tax. The district used one-time capital resources to support recurring operating expenses while approving raises and maintaining compensation costs above state funding allocations. One-time money cannot sustainably fund recurring obligations. Responsible stewardship means bringing recurring expenses within recurring revenues before returning to citizens for more.
Washington’s Constitution makes ample provision for education the state’s paramount duty. We already pay state taxes toward that obligation. Yet the state controls the funding system and conditions additional assistance on local levy collections. Stop making neighbors tax neighbors to compensate for a funding problem created in Olympia. Take the fight to the state.
We support education, teachers, children, and our community. That is precisely why we demand accountability. Four failed levies were not invitations to keep asking the same question. They were demands for change. Bring expenses under control, demand that Olympia fulfill its responsibility, and fight for meaningful local authority over education. Vote No.
Rebuttal of argument for
Calling programs “essential” does not answer the accountability question. YCS budgeted $99.7 million in expenditures against $90.3 million in revenue, with 84.7% of expenditures going to compensation. The district used one-time capital resources while maintaining recurring obligations above state funding allocations. The board controls those obligations; voters control the levy. Four No votes require change, not another request. Responsible stewardship means recurring expenses must have sustainable recurring revenue. Vote No.