In October 2014 the Levy Oversight Committee, chaired by former City Councilman Tim Burgess, suggested that charter schools become eligible for Levy dollars.

Given that earlier this year, Green Dot Charter Schools was able to get an illegal zoning departure for one of their new schools. The City did not follow its own code and the Seattle School Board sent a sharply worded letter to the City Council. I suspect there are those on the City Council who may support charter schools and may have pushed that departure.

I urge a NO vote on the 2018 Families, Education, Preschool and Promise levy.

I want to preface this thread by noting what former Councilman Tim Burgess, the co-chair of the current levy campaign, said at an event. He said that voters have always supported this levy because it supports Seattle's kids.Okay but here's the thing -There should be no emotional blackmail -- for any kind of vote. Because tax dollars are so precious, whatever we spend them on needs to have clarity in vision and the confidence that the dollars will be well-spent.I came to this decision to say no to the levy with sadness because I have supported this levy since its inception. But this current levy, the Families, Education, Pre-school and Promise levy is 1) The new F&E levy will cost the median Seattle homeownerIt’s really not fair to say a small extra amount a month doesn’t matter; for those who are low-income or have fixed incomes, it does count.With the larger property tax increase already enacted by the Legislature to fulfill the McCleary decision,And, Seattle Schools has its own two levy renewals in Feb. 2019 and I believe that with those four large property taxes, there might be voter fatigue.As well, the City has many other pressing problems. Is expanding the Department of Education at the top of that list? I don't know if I believe they have the ability or bandwidth to handle this much additional work.2)I don't argue that Pre-k isn't a good thing. It is.To note, the City was funding Pre-k in the F&E levy prior to its separate Pre-K levy passed in 2014. Here are the numbers:In 2014-2015 in the Families & Education levy,In its own Pre-K levy, the total was $58M, or a little overThose two totals combined are aboutNow, with Pre-K rolled into the F&E levy,And, with the news that Jeff Bezos will be creating free, high-quality Pre-ks for low-income families, you have to question this kind of spending.Seattle is also payingfor its Pre-K than the gold-standard for Pre-k, Boston; $12K versus $11K.As well, the growth of Pre-K is highly dependent on space.The City gets space in SPS for free for its Pre-ks and so, if they have to pay for space, that will be a problem for growth. Where will the money come from for that space?The City claims they have created "new" Pre-K spaces but many are co-opted from previous Pre-K offerings.Lastly, the Times just had an article on the latest Seattle Pre-K program evaluation. There was a lot to like except for a couple of problems.(Yes, Seattle's Pre-K suspends 4-year olds.)3) The City has been unclear about whether they will continue to supportas part of the K-12 portion of the F&E levy. As someone who volunteers in a Title One school, I can tell you first-hand how greatly needed in-school Family Support workers are for low-income or immigrant families. Families count on those staff to be4) There islanguage in the new F&E levy that says that tRecall that in 2012 city of Seattle itself voted in - in a firm majority –against charter schools.I had a lawyer who specializes in public education issues check that language and there is nothing there in the levy language that protects the K-12 dollars for Seattle Public Schools.(I do want to note that I support the Promise program for ANY Seattle public school graduate, charter or not.)Why do I think this could happen? To wit:Burgess said at a recent event that the question is whether charter schools are legal. That's only half-true. We await the ruling from the Washington State Supreme Court on the case before them (they heard oral arguments already so the ruling could come at any time. As I have said, I believe they will uphold the law.)The other question isI think they could but I also think the City could say the levy funds are only for SPS schools.Because while the State recognizes charter schools as public schools, they also recognize them as different because charter schools doget education dollars from the same pot as traditional public schools and because charter schools havedirect elected oversight.If the State sees charter schools as different, so can the City.My understanding is that the City Attorney's office is working on this.The Mayor and the City Council have sent out a levy that is vague in places.If the levy does not pass, there are funds to continue on becauseIf the levy loses, it will be a signal to the City to retool it and get it right. They can come back in April 2019 with a new levy.