Lakota is asking voters to approve a 7.9-mill emergency levy that will expire after 10 years. It will cost $242 per year for homes assessed at $100,000. According to the Butler County Auditor, the median home assessed valuation in the Lakota Local School District is $183,730, which means the levy would cost an additional $443 in taxes.
Levy Co-Chair Sandy Wheatley said levies are the way schools are funded in Ohio, and because they do not keep up with inflation or factor in additional student growth, the dollars will eventually not match up to the cost of doing business.
“It’s not so easy when people just throw out these facts,” she said. “We could make the cuts now, and we could maybe put off the levy for another year, but because this is the way Ohio funds schools — tax levies are a built-in part of Ohio school funding — you can cut and cut and cut, but eventually you are going to have to go to the voters.”
More information, she said, is found online at www.forlakota.org.
The Citizens Against the Lakota Tax Levy members point voters to www.nolakotalevy.com.
Treasurer Dan Varney said the goal is for people to see past rhetoric and scare tactics that say the quality of the district will decline without additional funds.
“Those are just ploys,” he said. “They’re just intimidation factors ...the true picture is (Lakota’s) expenditures are completely out of line.”
The consumer index rose 15.6 percent in the past five years, and while Lakota’s enrollment grew 15 percent, he said expenditures grew 39.6 percent.
“That’s not a sustainable model,” Varney said. “... Look at the facts. No more no less.”
A fact, Varney said, is that in 2010, Lakota’s expenditures will be $166.7 million. By 2014, they will be $201.2 million.
“The bottom line is, if they pass this levy and add another $76 million into the kitty, by June 30 of 2014 they’re going to be $16.7 million in the hole again and they’re going to need additional revenue. All they’re doing with this levy is stalling the inevitable two more years.”
But, Interim Treasurer Alan Hutchinson said it is a matter of putting numbers into perspective.
“I feel really disappointed that they believe Lakota has out of control spending, because the data doesn’t show that,” Hutchinson said. “I can look at a glass and say it’s half full. They can look at a glass and say it’s half empty. We are all looking at the same glass.”
When looking at the cost per pupil, he said Lakota’s costs have gone from $8,026 in 2005 to $9,503 in 2009. That, he says shows a growth in expenses of 18.4 percent, not 39 percent in raw numbers the opposition is using. Raw numbers, he said, increase at a different pace than cost-per-pupil, a unit of measure better applied in a service-based industry. Lakota’s state funding per student has gone down 5.5 percent in five years, he added, forcing Lakota to make up that funding loss.
“They have done as good a job as they can possibly do at Lakota to keep the costs down,” he said. “...When you grow a couple hundred students, your cost per pupil isn’t going to go down except if you make drastic cuts.”
As the district population grows, a new school board policy limits the amount the budget can increase, he said.
But it there is no additional revenue, “nothing’s sustainable.”
Spokesman Richard Hoffman said 62 percent of voters in May agreed, at least in part, with his group’s message.
He joins Varney in representing 25 leaders of the No Lakota Levy campaign and about 200 members, each of whom has a different reason for voting no.
His group is not anti-school or anti-Lakota, but the school district makes them appear as villains for being “anti-expense and excess taxes,” he said, explaining why the majority wish to remain anonymous.
“(Lakota is) really dividing the community,” he said. “They’ve been invited to engage the community and the local business people instead of fighting them. They’re hellbent to hit their goal.”
Varney said an issue with many was the contract agreement that did not include a pay cut from teachers or a freeze in step schedule increases.
Because teachers did not agree to a freeze in step schedule increases the next two years, Varney said, Lakota will spend money on raises, but will then cut transportation.
“If they’re so worried about the kids, let’s forgo the step raises and save the transportation and bussing,” Varney said.
People are “tired of business as usual at Lakota,” and change has to start somewhere, he said.
Wheatley said Lakota must remain competitive with other districts.
“I wouldn’t go in and just cut morale out from underneath people by saying you’re taking a 30 percent cut in pay,” she said.
Hoffman also blames Ohio legislators for cutting Lakota’s funding and said a no vote will force the state’s hand to fix the problem.
In the short-term, he said, cuts may be made, but they won’t impact education as much as the school district says.
“The school system will still be successful, because there will be people in the community that will step forward and they will help and they will not let that school system step apart ... Money doesn’t equal success.”
Disagreeing vehemently, For Lakota communications chair Pam Perrino said the cuts will impact students and the community. Legislators have not listened to continuous pleas to fix Lakota’s funding and will not step in to help.
“We cannot solve national issues like teachers’ unions and the state funding problem by voting no on Lakota,” she said. “Lakota cannot change the world. If we fail the levy, it just hurts kids right now.”
A great community, she said, includes good schools, good families, good business and good support structures like fire and police.
“They’re all interlinked. If one of those is drastically weakened, it impacts the community.”
About the Author