Seattle Public Schools scraps controversial closure plan, so what's next?

SEATTLE - Seattle Public Schools has officially withdrawn its controversial proposal to close up to 21 schools as a way to address its nearly $100 million budget shortfall for the 2025-2026 school year.

The plan, which was eventually scaled down to four schools, faced months of fierce backlash from parents and community members, who criticized district leadership for lack of transparency and poor financial planning. However, the district announced Monday that it would abandon the proposal entirely, leaving parents relieved but still concerned about the district's financial future.

So what's next for SPS, and its huge budget shortfall? Keep reading to learn more.

Budget challenges persist

SPS operates on a $1.25 billion annual budget, with 83% allocated to salaries and benefits for teachers and staff. One of the district’s most significant financial pressures is declining enrollment. SPS currently has 23,000 elementary school students. Many of their schools are at under capacity but 29 schools are well below their budgeted capacity, with over 100 fewer students than expected in each of those 29 schools.

Superintendent Dr. Brent Jones initially proposed the closures as a way to consolidate resources. The closure of 4 schools was estimated to save the district $5.5 million annually. However, Jones announced this week that the district will seek other ways to address the shortfall, emphasizing the need to preserve community trust.

A look back at what Dr. Jones said during an October 9th meeting could give us a glimpse of what is ahead for the district.

"We need about $40 million in state support for areas like special education, transportation and materials," Jones said during the board meeting. "We also need to find $30 million in internal efficiencies and make some very hard choices."

Parents demand accountability

Parents and advocacy groups have been vocal in their criticism of the district’s leadership throughout the process. At public meetings, they've accused SPS of mismanaging funds and failing to engage meaningfully with the community.

"The mismanagement of funds and the dissonance between the vision and actual practices of this district administration needs to be addressed," one parent said during the same board meeting.

State superintendent weighs in

Chris Reykdal, superintendent of public instruction, placed part of the blame for Seattle’s financial struggles on past legislative decisions. He criticized the forced reduction of local levy funds following the McCleary lawsuit — a landmark case that required the state to fully fund basic education.

"Levy funds were forcibly removed from many local school districts when the Legislature addressed the McCleary lawsuit," Reykdal said in a statement. "Those levy options should be fully restored this legislative session so that Seattle and other districts can fund the enrichment opportunities that their communities are willing to tax themselves to provide. Nothing in the Washington State Supreme Court’s McCleary ruling required local levies to be cut; that was a political decision made by a former Legislature."

Reykdal’s comments highlight a growing push to not only increase state funding but also to restore districts’ ability to raise additional money through local levies. Advocates argue that these changes are critical for ensuring equitable education across Washington.

Seeking state support

The call by SPS to appeal to the state legislature for $40 million to help their deficit got the attention of David Olson who recently ran against Reykdal for the superintendent position. Olson is a school board member in the Peninsula School District but says he is not speaking on behalf of his district, but as an OSPI candidate. He is warning that relying on state bailouts is not a sustainable long-term solution.

"I don’t think it sets a good tone statewide, because there are other school districts that are struggling financially and would not benefit with Seattle Public Schools getting a bailout," Olson said.

He is advocating for better training and education on public finance for school board members.

"We are in the business of educating students, but you still have to pay your bills, you use revenue and expenditure, you still have to balance your budget," Olson said.

When it comes to a long-term fix, Olson agrees the State Legislature needs to do more to not only fully fund schools, but also to change the formula on how things are done.

"Current funding model is not equitable, it needs to be fixed, the prototypical funding model is absolutely broken. It did not meet intent," Olson said.

What's next for SPS?

With closures off the table, SPS must quickly identify alternative solutions to its budget crisis. The district has two levies coming up for a vote in February: one for operations and another for capital expenses. These could provide temporary relief, but systemic challenges remain.

Advocates, including the group All Together for Seattle Schools, are urging SPS to conduct a comprehensive budget audit and prioritize cuts outside the classroom, such as reducing central office expenses and consulting contracts.

"We need a sustainable plan that prioritizes students and avoids pitting parents against educators," the group said in a statement.

A call for statewide reform

Seattle's challenges are emblematic of broader issues facing public education across Washington. Advocacy groups are also calling on the state legislature to step in and fully fund public schools.

"Our kids deserve better," said one advocate. "It’s time for bold solutions to fix a broken system and ensure every student has access to a quality education."

For now, the future of Seattle schools may hinge on state support and the district’s ability to rebuild trust with its community.