Oldham County school leaders cite strong FY24 reserves, propose lowering tax rate to 79.7¢ and consider staff stipend

The Oldham County Board of Education on Aug. 7 reviewed an unaudited fiscal 2024 financial report showing strong reserves and debated tax‑rate options after certified assessments rose 8.4 percent.

Board members were told the district ended FY24 with a general fund balance recorded at about $31.7 million and a contingency (budgeted reserve) of roughly $17 million, or about 17 percent of the general fund. “We were able to end with a contingency of $17,000,000 which is about 17 and a half percent for our general fund,” Dr. Shelton told the board as he walked through the unaudited numbers.

Why it matters: The certified assessment increase — the revaluations applied to existing property — raised projected local revenue above earlier conservative estimates. That surplus creates an option for the board: lower the tax rate so taxpayers pay less per $100 of assessed value or keep the rate flat (81.2¢) and accept higher local revenue but face the procedural risk that the levy could be the subject of a recall petition if it yields more than a 4 percent increase in revenue.

Most important facts - FY24 unaudited figures: general fund balance about $31.7 million; contingency about $17 million (~17%). - Capital funds: staff said capital‑outlay/building fund balances remained strong (district cited in excess of $15 million) and that roughly $4.9 million in capital outlay reimbursements are expected to be transferred back to the general fund once invoices and purchase orders are finalized. - Certified assessment change: 8.4 percent increase in assessed value vs. the 5 percent used for earlier projections. - Tax‑rate options: staff presented the “4% rate” (a board option whose levy would generate approximately a 4 percent increase in revenue) at 79.7¢ and noted the district’s current rate sits at 81.2¢. Dr. Shelton recommended the board consider levying 79.7¢: “My suggestion would be … to lower it to the 4% rate at 79.7¢.” - Recall process: staff explained that any levy that raises revenue above the 4 percent threshold can be the subject of a petition and, if enough signatures are gathered, placed on the November ballot; petition thresholds are set by state law (staff estimated signatures on the order of 10 percent of registered voters as a typical requirement).

Board discussion and next steps Board members pressed staff on details: how the contingency differs from the fund balance, the timing of the capital transfer and audit, and what options would mean for teacher and staff pay commitments. Staff said the capital transfer must be processed before the AFR audit closes. Members asked staff to run additional revenue projections under different assessment and interest scenarios (for example, lower investment earnings) before the board adopts a final levy.

Staff described the timeline and advertising requirements for any rate the board chooses. The certified assessment triggers a 45‑day window (measured from the date of certification) during which the board must set and advertise a proposed levy; the district must publish statutory notices (staff explained the district’s newspaper runs and deadlines) and hold a public hearing. Staff recommended the board consider the 4%/79.7¢ option to lower the rate for taxpayers while keeping anticipated revenue near prior projections. Staff also warned a decision to hold the rate flat at 81.2¢ could expose the levy to recall.

Staff stipend The packet included a recommended one‑time staff incentive (a stipend). Board packets and staff said the timeframe for payment would be November or December, and eligibility would be limited to employees who met full‑time status by Nov. 1 and who are active employees on the date the stipend is paid. Staff said the district will confirm a final pay date after accounting and payroll tasks are complete and will communicate eligibility and timing to employees if the board approves.

What was not decided Board members discussed but did not take a final vote on a tax levy or the stipend during the meeting. Staff were directed to prepare the statutorily required advertising language and schedule options for the board, run additional revenue forecasts under alternate assumptions and prepare communication language for public notice and employee notification.

Ending Board members asked staff for written projections that show the budget impact of levying 79.7¢ versus keeping the rate flat; they also asked for the exact advertised wording the district will submit to the Oldham Era so the board can review it before publication. Staff told the board they will return with the requested analyses and with the notice language in time to meet publication deadlines if the board wants to act on the levy within the 45‑day window.