Litchfield Elementary School District officials are warning that a November ballot measure aimed at putting more education dollars into classroom instruction could instead force districts to reconsider spending on transportation, student support, maintenance and other services that keep schools operating.
The Litchfield Elementary School District governing board received an extensive presentation Sept. 8 on Proposition 320, which would require certain Arizona school districts to spend at least 60% of their operational expenditures on what the measure calls “direct instructional expenses.”
Litchfield would be subject to the requirement. Under the Arizona Auditor General’s current accounting methodology, the district spent about $61.6 million of its $107 million in operational spending on instruction in fiscal year 2025, or 57.5%.
That is above the 51.8% average for Litchfield’s peer districts, Chief Financial Officer Michael Vaughn told the board.
“We’re in a much better position than most districts,” Vaughn said.
However, one of the biggest questions surrounding the proposition is what will ultimately count toward the 60% requirement.
The measure directs the Arizona Auditor General to define “direct instructional expenses” and “operational spending.” For its analysis, Litchfield used the Auditor General’s existing instruction category as the closest available estimate.
“This is a planning assumption,” Vaughn said. “We’re not saying that the Auditor General will ultimately use this exact definition.”
The distinction matters because the Auditor General currently considers instruction, student support and instructional support to be “classroom spending,” but only the instruction category is included when calculating a district’s instructional percentage.
That means expenses for nurses, psychologists, speech services, occupational and physical therapy, behavioral support, instructional coaches, curriculum, professional development and some special education services can be considered classroom spending without being classified as instruction.
“These are accounting classifications,” Vaughn said. “They tell us where spending is categorized for reporting purposes. They do not necessarily tell us whether the spending is important to students or necessary to operate our schools.”
District sees few easy places to cut
If Proposition 320 passes, districts below 60% would not have to reach the threshold immediately. Beginning in fiscal year 2027-28, they would generally have to increase the percentage devoted to direct instructional expenses by at least half a percentage point annually until reaching the required level.
Litchfield had about $45.4 million in fiscal 2025 operational spending outside the Auditor General’s instruction category, but Vaughn cautioned against interpreting that amount as money available for cuts.
“$45.4 million outside instruction does not mean $45.4 million was discretionary,” he said. “Much of that spending supports services that are required, operationally necessary, or directly connected to the student experience.”
The district also may have less room to find savings than the numbers suggest.
According to the district’s presentation, the Auditor General already rates Litchfield’s administrative spending as “very low” compared with peers and its transportation costs as “low,” while plant operations are comparable.
“There may not be one large category that can simply be reduced without creating an impact somewhere else,” Vaughn said.
About 81% of the district’s maintenance and operations spending goes toward employee salaries and benefits. Vaughn said significant changes in the district’s spending mix therefore could affect staffing, staffing models or how services are delivered.
Among the possibilities the district could have to evaluate are changes to general education are transportation, instructional coaching and professional development, custodial and maintenance service levels, administration and student support services.
Vaughn stressed those were examples rather than proposed cuts.
Board members criticize proposal
Board members expressed concerns about the proposition, particularly because some expenditures outside the instruction category are legally required or essential to operating schools.
Board member Melissa Zuidema questioned how districts could reduce spending in areas such as special education while continuing to meet federal and state requirements.
Vaughn cautioned that Proposition 320 does not prohibit spending on special education.
“What I am trying to show is, if you were to shift spending from other categories to instruction, these are the categories that your options are in,” he said. “In many of those categories, there are legal requirements for us to maintain that spending.”
Board members were also critical that the proposition's requirements would apply to covered school districts but not charter schools.
“At the end of the day, if this was going to be good for students, we would do this for all students," Zuidema said. "They would say that this law should be passed for all schools, not just public district schools. Not doing it for charter schools tells me that this has nothing to do with what’s best for students."
Board member Michele Wallace called the measure “very misleading to the voter,” arguing that expenses falling outside the instruction category are still being used to educate and support students.
Board member Scott Mikes questioned the origin of the 60% threshold and the uncertainty surrounding the definition of direct instruction.
“We have an arbitrary number that has been used in this proposition of 60% with a vague term for direct instruction, which is then left up for somebody to come along and decide whatever they feel like it to mean,” he said.
Funding penalties could compound problem
Proposition 320 includes escalating reductions to Classroom Site Fund allocations for districts that fail to meet its requirements.
That could be particularly consequential for Litchfield Elementary because nearly all of its Classroom Site Fund expenditures currently go toward instruction.
Vaughn said losing that funding could create a compounding problem: A penalty would reduce money already counted as instruction, potentially requiring the district to shift even more spending to reach the required percentage.
Using fiscal 2025 spending as an illustration, the district estimated it would need to shift about $2.6 million to reach 60%. That amount could increase substantially if Classroom Site Fund penalties were imposed.
Vaughn emphasized those figures are illustrations, not predictions.
“We do not know exactly what operational changes the district would make if changes became necessary, and we certainly do not know whether Litchfield would ever incur a penalty,” he said.
Arizona voters will decide Proposition 320 in the Nov. 3 general election.
Editor’s note: A grant from the Arizona Local News Foundation made this story possible. The foundation awarded 15 newsrooms to pay for solutions-focused education reporters for two years. Please submit comments at yourvalley.net/letters or email them to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.
Meet Stacy Stacy Mantle is joining the team at Independent Newsmedia, Inc. as an Education Solutions journalist, thanks to a grant from the Arizona Community Collaborative. She has a long history in education that ranges from teaching junior high and middle school to developing curriculum and standards-based assessments.
Community: A longtime advocate for animal welfare, Stacy is deeply involved in rescue efforts and volunteers with several nonprofit organizations.
Random Fact: Once upon a time, she shared her home with a pet coyote and two wolf hybrids. The experiences were wild enough to become the subject of her first book!
Education: She holds a BA in English with a minor in Political Science, a Post-baccalaureate in Secondary Education, and an MBA with a emphasis on Marketing.
Hobbies: In her spare time, Stacy writes fast-paced urban fantasy novels, crafts small-batch artisan soap, and is always up for hiking or off-roading through the Arizona wilderness with her husband of 23 years.
By 
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here