[ back ]
Amount debated for Chardon school levy
(by Joseph Koziol Jr. - June 30, 2010)
Amount debated for Chardon school levy
By JOSEPH KOZIOL JR.
The Chardon Board of Education opened talks last week on going back to the ballot in November with the debate centering on what the public can afford compared with what the district needs.
Board members began by looking at the district's finances as well as six levy amounts, ranging from 2 mills to 6 mills, using the more traditional property tax. The discussions come on the heels of a May ballot issue for a 1 percent earned-income tax that voters defeated by a 3-1 margin.
The board did not arrive at a final decision on the matter and has scheduled another meeting for July 8 to continue discussions.
Board member Paul Stefanko provided documentation from the Ohio Department of Education and the Ohio Department of Taxation to make his case for a small levy this time around.
Mr. Stefanko said residents in the district saw a drop of 4 percent in income over the past two years, and school officials must be cautious in their approach to taxpayers.
He said the district is asking for money that will be used for raises from a population that has not been getting raises for two or three years themselves. "We have to be realistic in the levy request," he said.
Mr. Stefanko said he believes a levy in the 4-mill to 6-mill range would be too much and asked the board to consider 2 mills this November.
"I think we're in the 'get-through mode' until the economy turns around," he said.
Instead of turning to the taxpayers, Mr. Stefanko said, the board should look to cut costs in various areas, including special education, part-time compensation and health care.
But School Superintendent Joseph Bergant II said seeking too small an amount could put the district in a bind. While officials will look to trim costs even further, he said, unfunded mandates by the state will require the district to find money it now doesn't have.
"We have to be careful not to strap the district without enough money to pay the unfunded mandates," Mr. Bergant said.
"I don't disagree with you that we have to go over things with a fine-toothed comb," he said. "But the two-year levy won't last more than two years with those mandates."
He said that adding four teachers for the state-required, all-day kindergarten will cost roughly $150,000. That figure does not include benefits, he said. Other costs that will be coming are step increases for employees at $250,000 and bringing back a central office worker at $100,000.
He said he did not believe a 6-mill levy would pass even in a good economy, but 2 mills would be insufficient.
He said no matter what levy amount the school seeks, the district will not add to its programming.
Mr. Bergant said going too low with the levy could put the district in the red, a situation that will cause the state to take control and come in to make cuts that the district may not want.
Mr. Stefanko said he understood what Mr. Bergant said, but he wants to get a levy passed in November. "My concern is that the next levy pass. It has to," he said.
Board member Cynthia Sague said voters often have to make choices, especially when they have to decide between police and fire protection and how much they can afford. She said families often will make sacrifices on personal needs to protect their families. She said they can do the same with a school levy.
Mrs. Sague said maintaining local schools does have benefits for the public. In addition to providing children with a good education, it also serves to keep up property values.
When asked her opinion in the matter, district Treasurer Stephanie Swain said 4.5 mills would be the realistic option, as long as expenses stay status quo. "I understand what Paul is saying -- 2 mills would pass," she said. "But is it realistic? I don't think so."
Board President Blake Rear said, regardless of what amount the district chooses, the public cannot afford it at this time.
He said the board received criticism for trying to stray from the traditional form of taxation. But he said the message hasn't changed since then that the public is at its limit no matter what form the tax takes.
"There's no easy answer," he said. "The state has the power, and they won't do it. We stand there and get stoned by the public."
He said the district is now forced to go with a property tax that has been deemed unfair because of its inequities and was found unconstitutional by Ohio Supreme Court. Yet, he said, state legislators continue to ignore the issue and keep adding unfunded mandates to the schools.
[ back ]
