Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Taxes topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Piper USD 203 board votes to exceed revenue-neutral tax rate after public hearing

5741691 · September 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a Sept. 8 public hearing, the Piper USD 203 Board of Education adopted a resolution to exceed the revenue-neutral tax rate for the 2025–26 budget, voting 6–0 after hearing public opposition and staff explanation of how state aid and assessed valuations interact.

Piper USD 203’s Board of Education adopted a resolution Sept. 8 to exceed the revenue-neutral tax rate for the 2025–26 budget, voting 6–0 after a public hearing and staff presentation.

The board’s vote came after Kim Buckner, Director of Business for Piper USD 203, explained the district’s view of how a revenue-neutral rate operates for school taxing. “Revenue neutral rate is the no-levy that would bring in the same property tax revenue as last year,” Buckner said, and she added that because state aid falls as assessed valuation rises, adopting the revenue‑neutral rate can reduce total school revenue.

Buckner told the board that assessed valuation in the district rose about 9 percent and that adopting the revenue‑neutral rate would reduce state capital outlay aid for the district’s capital outlay fund by an estimated 61 percent in that fund, producing an approximate 8 percent total revenue decrease in the example she showed. She also noted that the district’s capital outlay levy has been set at 8 mills since a 2014 board action.

At the public podium, Tim Lewis, who identified himself as a longtime Piper resident, urged the board not to exceed the revenue‑neutral rate because of local affordability concerns. “Do not raise our taxes anymore… Vote no to exceed revenue neutral,” Lewis said. Jill Coates, another resident, also asked the board to remain revenue neutral and asked where district funds are spent.

The board then considered a formal resolution titled RNR‑2026, described in the meeting as "A resolution expressing property tax use and policy of USD 203 with respect to exceeding the revenue neutral tax rate for financing the annual budget for 2025–26," referencing KSA 79‑2988. After a motion and second, the board recorded roll-call votes of Armstrong, Beshore, Biondi, Fergus, Bader and Wells in favor; the motion passed 6–0.

Discussion vs. formal action: Buckner’s presentation and the public comments took place during the revenue‑neutral hearing portion of the meeting and were discussion and public input. The resolution vote was a formal board action recorded by roll call and adopted the district’s authorization to exceed the revenue‑neutral tax rate for the 2025–26 budget.

What the board adopted: The resolution authorizes the district to levy property taxes that exceed the revenue‑neutral tax rates calculated for 2025–26, as adjusted pursuant to KSA 79‑2988. The resolution itself does not specify line‑by‑line expenditure changes; it authorizes the board to set levies above the revenue‑neutral calculation to finance the adopted budget.

Next steps and context: Buckner and staff said the district will use levy authority in the context of the five local tax funds—general fund, supplemental general (local option budget), capital outlay, cost of living (flow through), and bond & interest—and that some of those funds are required or restricted by state law and board policy. Buckner explained that the district’s budget and levy decisions reflect changes in assessed valuation, state aid adjustments and district priorities such as sustaining programs, staffing, special education, and facility maintenance.

Public comment rules: Board policy restricted public‑comment follow‑up and prohibited board members from answering questions during the comment period; speakers were recorded and limited to three minutes.

Documents and reference: The board cited KSA 79‑2988 during the resolution discussion. The district provided a staff presentation and data tables showing assessed valuation, mill levies and fund‑level revenue comparisons used in the presentation.

The board immediately proceeded to other business after the vote; no amendment to the resolution was recorded.