Area resident provides his third in a series of columns about the upcoming Ridgefield Schools ballot propositions

Rob Anderson 
for Clark County Today

This is the final installment in a series examining Ridgefield’s Propositions 12 and 13. These measures propose significant tax increases for Ridgefield schools, raising crucial questions about accountability, spending priorities, and educational outcomes. Ridgefield’s rapid population growth highlights the importance of a strong education system. However, the data tells a troubling story: between 2019 and 2024, the district’s operational budget skyrocketed by nearly 70%, while enrollment grew by less than 18%. Worse, academic performance has declined.

So where has all this money gone? A closer examination points to one primary beneficiary: the teachers’ union members. Meanwhile, students, parents, and taxpayers are left with unmet expectations and diminishing results.

The cost of illegal teachers’ strikes

Ridgefield endured two teachers’ strikes in 2018 and 2022, and the possibility of a third looms in 2025. These strikes disrupted classrooms, strained community relationships, and resulted in significant salary increases — without any corresponding improvement in student outcomes.

Before the 2018 strike, a teacher with five years of experience earned a base salary of $37,378 for a 180-day work year — the equivalent of $54,000 when adjusted to a standard 260-day work year. After two strikes, that same teacher’s base salary has soared to $70,563, an 88% increase, or $101,921 on a full-year scale. Salaries have also climbed sharply across the board, with first-year teachers seeing a 78% increase and those with 12 years of experience receiving a 68% raise.

In contrast, the average wage increase for Clark County residents is closer to 15-20% over the same period. These raises far exceed the norm, and they don’t stop there. Teachers also receive additional benefits, including a 2% Time, Responsibility, and Incentive (TRI) pay boost, generous pensions, and extensive paid time off — 12 sick days, 4 parental leave days, 4 personal leave days, and 5 bereavement days. Additionally, a compressed salary schedule allows teachers to reach maximum pay more quickly.

While educators celebrated these benefits and raises, they came at a steep cost to taxpayers — with no improvement in academic performance to justify them.

Legal and ethical concerns

It’s important to note that public employee strikes are illegal under RCW 41.56.120. Yet Ridgefield teachers walked out in both 2018 and 2022, leaving parents scrambling for childcare and students without classrooms. Rewarding these illegal tactics with substantial pay raises undermines public trust and sets a dangerous precedent.

The 2022 strike was especially egregious, as it disrupted what was supposed to be the first fully normal school year following pandemic-related closures. The union defended the walkout by citing the need to protect “special education” services — claims that have since reemerged in the campaign for higher taxes under Proposition 12. However, the proposed levies contain no language guaranteeing funding for special education, casting doubt on the sincerity of these appeals.

A troubling pattern

With the district’s current labor agreement set to expire on August 31, 2025, history suggests another strike — or at least the threat of one — is likely if Proposition 12 passes. The 2022 levy, which increased revenue by 56%, was quickly followed by a strike demanding even higher salaries. Why wouldn’t the union employ the same tactic again?

The pattern is clear: illegal strikes have proven to be a powerful bargaining tool for the union, securing substantial raises for its members. Meanwhile, taxpayers shoulder the cost, while academic outcomes remain stagnant.

The data doesn’t lie. Teachers’ salaries have soared, but students have seen little benefit. Ridgefield’s operational budget has ballooned, leaving basic maintenance and upgrades neglected, while academic performance remains subpar. Taxpayers must recognize that the union prioritizes its members’ pay and benefits — not the well-being of Ridgefield’s children.

What this vote is really about

This isn’t about opposing teachers, students, or education — it’s about accountability. Voting “NO” on these levies sends a clear message: taxpayers deserve transparency and results. The district must focus on improving educational outcomes — not just handing out bigger paychecks.

Ridgefield residents have a unique opportunity to demand better. By rejecting Propositions 12 and 13, voters can signal that reckless spending, illegal bargaining tactics, and stagnating academic results are unacceptable. Teachers’ unions cannot have it both ways—demanding massive pay increases while expecting taxpayers to absorb the financial strain and inevitable cuts to programs and staff.

Let’s remember what this vote is truly about: ensuring a brighter future for Ridgefield’s students. By holding the district and the teachers’ union accountable, we can refocus on what matters most — our kids’ education — and work toward reforms that will improve public education and not just perpetuate mediocre and declining results. Vote “NO” to restore balance, demand accountability, and prioritize student success. 

For more information visit reformclarkcounty.com

---

Also read:

• 
  Opinion: In-n-Out Burger is so much more than fast food for so many of us
  Paul Valencia shares why In-n-Out Burger means more than just fast food for countless fans as Ridgefield nears its grand opening and Vancouver’s location begins construction.
• 
  Opinion: Washington’s June 2025 budget revisions – revenue up spending up more
  Mark Harmsworth of the Washington Policy Center critiques the state’s latest budget revisions, warning that new taxes—not organic growth—are driving revenue. He calls for fiscal restraint and long-term reform.
• 
  Opinion: Pedestrian control signals
  Doug Dahl explains Washington state law regarding crosswalks and pedestrian signals, offering safety insights and common misunderstandings about traffic control at intersection
• 
  Letter: ‘How can five part-time legislators without research support or reliable access to information serve as an effective check on six full-time elected executives’
  Bob Zak expresses agreement with recent opinions on the Clark County Charter’s imbalance and endorses John Ley’s transit preference while questioning light rail costs and Council effectiveness.
• 
  POLL: Should the Clark County Clerk remain an elected position?
  Following public opposition, Clark County Council dropped a proposal to make the clerk an appointed role. Readers can now weigh in through this week’s poll on whether the clerk should remain elected.