Bend, OR – In 2023, Oregon lawmakers passed House Bill 2531, a measure designed to promote energy efficiency by requiring the replacement of fluorescent lights with highly efficient, mercury-free LED bulbs in buildings across the state. The bill was widely hailed as a step forward in addressing climate change and reducing environmental harm. However, as school districts began implementing the new rules, many found themselves facing unexpected challenges, prompting calls for legislative intervention.
In districts like Lebanon and Sheridan, officials have reported serious issues with the LED bulbs that were meant to replace outdated fluorescent lighting. Sean Vesper, the operations and facilities manager for the 700-student Sheridan School District, described the LED bulbs as problematic, saying they “buzz, hum, and produce less than optimal light,” which he believes is affecting students’ ability to learn.
The difficulties arise from the fact that the new LEDs are often incompatible with the older lighting fixtures, meaning schools have had to purchase more expensive bulbs that frequently burn out or flicker. Vesper added that some LED bulbs last only about a year before needing replacement.
The financial burden of retrofitting schools to accommodate the new lights has also caused concern. In the Salem-Keizer School District, Oregon’s second-largest district, Superintendent Andrea Castaneda testified before lawmakers that it could cost as much as $42 million to replace the outdated fixtures with those compatible with LEDs. With limited funds available, the district is unable to cover such costs without diverting money from other critical areas.
School officials argue that they were not consulted about the financial impact of the bill, and that such unfunded mandates only add strain to already tight budgets. Stacy Michaelson, a lobbyist for the Oregon School Boards Association, pointed out that schools were not asked to conduct a fiscal analysis of the bill before it was passed, calling the oversight “problematic.”
The controversy over the LED mandate has sparked a legislative response. In the current session, Rep. Kevin Mannix (R-Salem) introduced House Bill 2307, which would allow school districts to continue using fluorescent bulbs until 2030. The bill is intended to give districts more time to secure funding for the necessary upgrades. So far, the proposal has gained traction, with lawmakers expressing support for the idea.
Mannix, who introduced the bill after discussions with Castaneda, described the response to the bill as positive, with many colleagues backing it as a necessary fix to the issues schools are facing. Rep. Courtney Neron (D-Wilsonville), the chair of the House Education Committee, also indicated that she considers the bill an important solution to the problem.
This situation in Oregon is not unique. School districts across the state have long struggled with unfunded mandates from lawmakers, which often require schools to comply with new regulations without providing the necessary funding to cover the costs. This issue has only become more pressing as schools work to recover from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing challenges of improving student performance.
In addition to the LED bill, school districts are also opposing other pieces of legislation, such as Senate Bill 916, which would allow striking workers to receive unemployment benefits during a work stoppage. School leaders are concerned that if this bill passes, districts could be forced to reimburse unemployment benefits paid out during a teachers’ strike, potentially costing millions of dollars. Portland Public Schools recently estimated that a one-month strike could cost the district as much as $8.7 million.
While the state legislature’s efforts to address climate change and worker rights may have noble goals, school districts are calling for more thoughtful consideration of the impact on their budgets. As Vesper in Sheridan put it, “We’ve got to scramble and upgrade or spend outrageous amounts of money on these basic plug-and-play LEDs,” which he says have become a burden for schools already struggling to meet their educational priorities.
As House Bill 2307 makes its way through the legislative process, schools are hoping that lawmakers will take their concerns into account and offer a reprieve from the costly and disruptive switch to LED lighting. For now, the debate continues, with the future of Oregon’s school districts hanging in the balance.
