The Adobe Flash Player is required to view this multimedia interactive. Get it here.

If voters reject Lakota levy, ‘deep cuts’ will be made quickly

Income tax was ruled out because the first collection would come too late

Poll

Do you plan to support the Lakota levy?

Poll

Should Lakota's unions take a pay freeze?

Situation is ‘dire,’ levy committee tells voters
Pay freeze could save Lakota schools $5 million next year
77 jobs lost as Lakota approves $5.9M in cuts

New State law gives school districts reach to punish cyberbullying
10:42 a.m.
GE plans to hire 5,000 veterans
10:38 a.m.
Slick conditions cause several accidents on roadways
10:27 a.m.
Companies expected to announce expansions, increase in jobs
9:03 a.m.
Forecast calls for rain this Valentine’s Day
7:38 a.m.
> More headlines

By Lindsey Hilty, Staff Writer Updated 1:16 PM Monday, March 22, 2010

LIBERTY TWP. — If Lakota voters say no to a levy this May, cuts to the budget will be aggressive.

It isn’t a threat, but a reality of a “dire” situation, Treasurer Craig Jones said.

But former levy opposition leader Richard Hoffman said voters need to say no in order to force the district’s hand to change the way it does business and reduce contract costs.

“I don’t think it’s we don’t want to support the schools, but we don’t want to support the unions that stand behind the schools,” he said. “People have to vote no in order to force the school board and the state of Ohio to deal with the union problem.”

He said “fear mongering” is not the way to get money out of the community.

“ ... When a union protects the dynamic movement of hiring and firing, wage freezes and other aspects of a free market, it only drives costs up to where the local community cannot support that expectation, and as a citizen I do not want to support an organization that is out of touch with free market practices,” he said. “The bottom line, the costs are extraordinarily too much ... The level of expectation is too high and to expect the community to continue to pay at that level, especially in the economic conditions we are in is absolutely absurd.”

Although there is no organized opposition yet, Hoffman said he is keeping an eye on how the school board deals with negotiations and to see if “divisive tactics” are used before deciding if opposition is necessary.

“I don’t think unions are going away any time soon, and to vote no solely on that is kind of ridiculous,” parent Kristi Bachman said. “I want to continue to have excellent teachers. I think that’s the most important thing to have in a good school district. I think if we’re going to draw those excellent teachers, we need to be competitive on the salary scale. The funding problem is not solely just salary. It’s cutbacks from the state.”

A sense of urgency

Board President Joan Powell said the past five years the district stretched a levy despite rapid growth of students and declining state funding. Now, a projected $26 million deficit by 2012 puts the district in worse shape than it was in 2005.

“We don’t have lots of time,” she said. “We have got to reverse this. People might think ‘we could fail this levy, and they will just come back and ask us again.’ We are going to have to move very quickly into deep cuts, because we don’t have the luxury of time to wait for the result.”

Because the district delayed placing a levy on the ballot last November, it now has three chances to pass a levy in 2010 or face substantial additional cuts. It takes a year to collect funds after a levy is passed by voters.

“I think its more dire now because we have a bigger deficit that we’re facing and we’re closer to the deficit and the economy is much worse now than it was back (in November),” Jones said.

According to an Ohio School Boards Association publication, it takes an average of three election attempts to build awareness and support needed to pass a school levy. The last time Lakota passed an operating and bond levy in 2005, it took four attempts.

Per Ohio law, if the district reduces its budget to state minimums and still can’t pass a levy as it enters a fiscal deficit, the state takes over the financial affairs. It would loan the district money until a levy passes, but it would have to be paid back with interest, Jones said.

“I think people are seeing what kind of situation we have, and the real need for the levy right now,” Jones said. “If it doesn’t pass in 2010, then we’re really in a bind.”

What’s  on the ballot?

The district opted for an incremental tax levy for the May 4 ballot, which at 6.9 mills in 2011 will cost a tax payer an additional $211 on a $100,000 home until 2013 when the millage goes to 11 mills and costs a total of $367 additional.

The idea, Treasurer Craig Jones said, is that taxpayers get to bank their own money rather than give it all up front to the district.

The levy starts small and gradually rises to match the needs of the schools as property values grow. As tax values rise, there is a larger tax base, potentially reducing the burden to Lakota residents, which fund 57 percent of the district’s budget compared to 39 percent from the state and  4 percent from the federal government.

Most operating levies require taxspayers to pay at a constant rate for several years, building up a cash reserve.

Why not  an income tax?

Jones said many levies were considered, including an income tax. While it would benefit Lakota because of its high median income, it takes 18 months until the first collection — too long for the district to wait. It places all the burden on residents rather than sharing it with businesses, and other government entities are resistant to schools using the tax, because it competes with their levies, he said.

Share this article