Other towns don’t have Prop. 46. If, for some reason, the schools need and can substantiate requests for more funding than Prop. 46 would allow, they can do so.
Proponents of Prop. 46 will claim that this is a good thing. They will assert that it makes government deal with a finite amount of funding, and schools always seem to stay open.
What some people refuse to consider is that there are some years when extra expenditures may be necessary, say to buy some new buses, so some major renovations, replace textbooks, equipments, or any other fairly expensive item you can think of. It may be, that we will spend more in the long run by putting off certain expenses. Just as a hypothetical example: suppose there is a leaky roof that could be fixed for $10,000 today. It may be put off because there isn’t money to pay for the repairs. Once the leak is allowed to continue, there may be substantially more damage and costs in the future, as things under the roof get damaged. Save $10,000 this year, and pay $50,000 next year instead. Again, I’m not saying that this is happening, but that is the sort of situation that Prop. 46 encourages.
I agree that sometimes tough decisions need to be made to keep budgets from getting out-of-control. Prop. 46 means that WA can send a bill for tuition, and WPS has to make cuts in order to comply with the limits that are set. Other towns can decide on a yearly basis what they are willing to pay once they receive a bill from WA.
If someone had the financial backing and the time to pursue it, a lawsuit may find that Prop. 46 is not legal. It was challenged when it was first voted on, but the Town chose not to appeal the Superior Court ruling.