The public meeting by Fairfield school officials did not seek to persuade attendees to vote for ballot tax issue – such campaigning by school officials is unlawful in Ohio – but rather they used the forum to present financial information on the district’s increasingly large budget deficits and to seek what budget cuts are preferred by the attendees.
Their opinions are being included in an upcoming budget reduction plan district officials will next present to the Fairfield Board of Education to prepare future financial cut plans should voters reject the proposed income tax.
Fairfield Schools Superintendent Billy Smith told the audience: “We are hoping for the best but we have to prepare for the worse.”
Smith and other district officials cited recent years of declining or stagnant state school funding as forcing the school system to seek the 1.25% earned income tax.
The proposed 1.25% earned income tax does not tax retirees’ pensions, Social Security, interest, dividends, or capital gains.
The tax also does not tax business net profits, only wages and self-employment net earnings, and if approved by voters in the May 5 election, would be administered and collected by the Ohio Department of Taxation, not the district.
Should the ballot issue win election approval, collection of the 1.25% earned income tax would not begin until Jan. 1, 2027 and would be a continuing school tax.
The 10,000-student district faces a $9.4 million deficit this fiscal year, which ends on July 1, without any new, voter-approved tax increase.
Phillips said Fairfield Schools would see deficits growing each fiscal year, under officials’ five-year forecast, reaching $28.4 million by fiscal year 2030 and totaling roughly $99.2 million cumulatively if no action is taken.
The public forum included attendees gathering at tables in the school’s gym and listing their priorities of possible school program budget cuts including transportation, sports, arts and music and other student extracurricular activities as well as potential teacher and other personnel reductions.
Fairfield schools resident Beverly Barton said she plans to vote against the proposed tax hike and cited the economic pressures of rising costs of living for not only her family but for other families under financial strain.
“What about the single mom, who has a couple of kids in school and she is trying to put food on the table and still pay her bills,” said Barton.
“A big portion of this problem is the state not doing their part (school funding) but you have to think of everybody and you can’t just say the schools need the money.”
But Fairfield school parent Liesl(CQ)Bauer said the proposed earned income tax is necessary to maintain the quality of local public schools.
“I’ve been in this district for 20 years … and we haven’t passed a school levy in 15 years and I’m very frustrated with our state and federal government (school funding) as they keep taking money away from public education,” said Bauer.
So, the financial support for local schools “has to start somewhere.”
“We can’t just keep letting our communities and our children suffer the consequences of this lack of funding,” she said.
More information on the proposed 1.25% earned income tax and Fairfield Schools’ financial state and budget projections is available at the district’s website.
About the Author