Letters to the Editor
Letter to the Editor | Peninsula School District cuts art programs despite influx levy funding
It’s the last thing you want to hear as the parent of children who adore and excel in the arts: Peninsula School District (PSD) is cutting arts programs for the 2026-2027 school year.
In a Purdy Elementary School newsletter sent on 5/15/26, the school announced: “In order to meet state-required minimum instructional minutes for physical education, we have had to make the difficult decision to adjust our specialist schedule for next year.”
“This means that we will be transitioning away from a standalone Art specialist rotation and increasing dedicated time for physical education within the school day.”
In other words: our art teachers no longer have jobs, and our children no longer have a dedicated arts education.
This decision flies in the face of every taxpayer who voted to pass a three-year Replacement Educational Programs and Operations Levy on the February 2026 ballot. The levy passed with nearly 60% approval, indicating strong community support.
Even worse, PSD’s campaign to bolster the levy made promises that are already being torn to shreds: “These funds provide targeted help for students who need it and additional teachers and staff to support academics, arts, music, and student enrichment.”
Arts and music funding are mentioned several times on the district’s levy website, www.psd401.net/levy, as well as in PSD’s social media posts: “The levy funds music and the arts across our schools, including band, choir, performing arts, and the fine arts,” posted by PSD’s official Facebook account on November 24, 2025.
Now, only three months after the levy passed, PSD is reversing course by taking a hacksaw to its arts programs.
The stated justification for the arts budget cuts is the physical education standards required for grades 1-8 by the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), the state agency responsible for overseeing K–12 public education in Washington.
Mind you, none of this information was provided by the school or district; I did the research.
OSPI’s responsibility for physical education in public schools is codified in Washington state law under RCW 28A.230.040, originally enacted in 1969 and updated in 1984 and 2006.
Since 2006, according to WAC 392-410-135, “An average of at least one hundred instructional minutes per week per year in physical education shall be required of all pupils in the common schools in the grade school program (grades 1-8) unless waived pursuant to RCW 28A.230.040.”
This has been the standard for 20 years, so why the sudden rush to “meet state-required minimum instructional minutes for physical education,” as the Purdy Elementary School leadership team announced in its recent newsletter?
Along with throwaway insistence that “This was not an easy decision,” and “We deeply value the arts,” Purdy leadership offered no specific plan for how students would continue to explore learning and creative expression through art, especially in the absence of an art teacher or dedicated curriculum.
Even more insulting, the newsletter offered no insight into how much time students currently spend on physical education and how the time would be increased to meet state standards.
PSD has intentionally and cryptically framed this as a logistical and scheduling issue that simply cannot be avoided, while pitting the arts and physical education against each other in a binary choice that does not exist.
PSD would prefer that parents argue about which is more important, art or physical education, rather than FUND BOTH, which they should be more than able to do after the influx of tax dollars from the school levy, to the tune of $113 million over three years.
In fact, after comparing the Levy Spending Plan for 2025-2026 with the district’s 2027-2029 Proposed Spending Plan, I found that funding for Music and the Arts has increased by more than 250%, thanks to the adoption of the new levy.
For 2025-2026, the Instructional Programs and Building Allocations for Music and the Arts were allotted $580,000. Under the 2027-2029 Proposed Levy Spending Plan, the same programs are allocated more than $2 million.
If the arts programs are receiving a generous $2 million gift from the community to support music and the arts, why in the world is the district slashing its arts programs? And, more importantly, exactly where is that money going?
Notably, physical education is not present in the levy spending plans, therefore it must be funded by other sources.
Regardless, I call on PSD to transparently provide details on how levy funds will be allocated, to collaborate with the community to ensure that both our physical education and arts needs are met, and to take seriously their responsibility for advocating for our children.
I also urge parents and community members to reach out directly to the PSD Board and Superintendent Bahr to voice concerns.
Megan Sharma
Gig Harbor