Due to miscommunication, a statement of support for the South Whidbey School District’s $79.8 million bond measure is conspicuously missing from the Island County voters’ pamphlet.

It was the second problem with the guide brought to light in recent weeks, but this time the error appears to be the fault of a group that supports the bond.

This November marks the school district’s second attempt to pass the bond, which fell just short of receiving a 60% supermajority of “yes” votes in the April special election earlier this year. School officials are seeking to fund maintenance and improvements at the district’s two main facilities, the middle school/high school and the elementary school. Some of these projects include new siding, a roof replacement, the remodel of locker rooms and restrooms, repavement of parking lots and the installation of turf for the stadium field, among other things.

If passed, the bond would be collected at a rate of 70 cents per $1,000 of assessed property value, which amounts to a monthly property tax increase of $29.08 for someone with a home valued at $500,000.

According to Island County Auditor Sheilah Crider, no “argument for” statement for the bond was received from the pro-bond committee. Crider said repetitive attempts by the Island County Elections Office to contact the committee by email and phone were made to remind them of the deadline, which was Aug. 4 this year for the pro and con bond measure statements. She added that the rules for submitting statements for the voters’ guide are strictly governed by the Revised Code of Washington, and no exceptions are authorized.

Yet Betsy Hofius, one of two members of the pro-bond committee, said she didn’t receive any communication from the county elections office that said she was late in submitting the statement. On July 24, she erroneously submitted the “argument for” statement to an incorrect email address, but said she never received a bounce back message letting her know that she had sent it to the wrong address.

The missing statement asserts that the students and teachers deserve schools that are modern, safe and healthy and points out that the last bond was passed more than 30 years ago.

“Capital levies allow our school district to address ongoing maintenance. A bond is different,” it states. “The bond lets us take on necessary projects that are not a part of routine maintenance like replacing the high school roof. The roof is one of several urgent projects. Passing this bond provides funds for much needed upgrades to both the interior and the exterior spaces of our schools and will provide additional security for our students and staff. Improvements to mechanical and electrical systems will lessen environmental impact.

“Bond proposals include modernizing classrooms to meet the needs of today’s 21st century learners. Today’s schools must incorporate welcoming and flexible learning spaces. It is in these spaces that dynamic learning happens.”

Though voters won’t see this statement in the guide, a group of parents and grandparents who support the bond measure have endeavored to produce a post card that will be mailed to every household located within the school district boundaries.

“It’s a pretty big, bad thing to happen for the bond effort, for there to be no pro statement in the voters’ pamphlet,” said Katie Shapiro, who is part of the group. “It makes it seem like nobody cared to submit something, which is really not true.”

The mailer encourages constituents to vote “yes,” and lists a few of the many things the bond passing would fix, such as ailing HVAC systems.

The group also has started a GoFundMe to raise money for the cost of yard signs, advertisements and printed materials. As of Thursday, $4,600 has been raised for the cause. To donate, visit gofundme.com/f/pass-the-swsd-bond.

In addition to the missing bond statement, a statement by Chris Carlson, a candidate for Langley City Council, was accidentally replaced with a duplicate of the statement from Molly Hughes, who is running for reelection as Coupeville’s mayor.

The county auditor mailed out a notice to Langley voters with the entirety of Carlson’s statement. The same cannot be done for the school bond pro statement, Crider confirmed, since it was not received in the first place.

An earlier version of this story had Island County Auditor Sheilah Crider mistakenly stating that the deadline for submitting pro and con statements for bond measures was May 26, one week after the close of candidate filing week. In actuality, the deadline was Aug. 4, the Friday after the deadline for submitting bond measures. Although the deadline was not missed, the pro statement was still submitted to the incorrect email address.