Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Budget Hb96 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Buckeye Valley board hears how House bill 96 and property-tax changes could cut district revenue
Summary
Board members and district staff were briefed on proposed state budget changes in House Bill 96 and a separate property-tax reform proposal that, if enacted as discussed in the meeting, could reduce Buckeye Valley’s property-tax revenue by about $5 million annually and change how local levies are calculated.
Buckeye Valley Board of Education members heard a detailed briefing on state budget and tax proposals that the district’s speakers said could materially affect local revenue, including a possible $5 million annual reduction from a property-tax reform proposal and multiple changes contained in House Bill 96.
The issue came up during the treasurer’s monthly report and later in a separate legislative update from board member Mary Kate. The treasurer said a recently introduced property-tax reform proposal would “cut Buckeye Valley by $5,000,000 a year” if enacted in the form the board reviewed, and that the legislature must finish the budget by June 30. Mary Kate summarized the substitute budget that the Senate passed and the provisions she found most relevant to local schools.
Mary Kate said the substitute budget continues the final years of the Fair School Funding Plan with guarantees, leaves the base cost inputs unchanged, and adds new supplements and reporting requirements. She told the board the bill changes how certain levies are calculated — for example, requiring that emergency and substitute tax levies be included in the 20-mill floor calculation and requiring property-tax ballot language to show dollar amounts and use market value rather than auditor appraised value for some calculations.
The board was also told the budget language would change district financial reporting (shifting some reporting to a three-year format with more detail), alter carryover balance rules (from 30% to 50% with options for permanent improvement funds subject to use-within-three-years limits), and restore the county prosecutor as a member of the county budget commission. Mary Kate listed additional provisions in the budget substitute affecting transportation grants, school bus safety programs, vocational construction study committees, release time for religious instruction, required diagnostic assessments for K–3 math and reading, dyslexia screening measures, and new graduation and curriculum provisions.
Mary Kate cautioned that the substitute budget package contains dozens of policy changes that could have mixed effects depending on a district’s finances and that some details could still change before the bill is enacted. The treasurer repeated the immediate timing risk: the legislature’s work and any revenue changes would be final or clearer by June 30, the end of the fiscal year the district is closing.
Why it matters: Buckeye Valley officials said the district could face an abrupt decrease in property-tax revenue that is a significant portion of the local budget. Board members and staff said they are monitoring the bills to understand how levy calculations, state aid protections, and newly required reporting would affect planning for fiscal 2026.
No formal board action was taken on the budget items during the meeting; the discussion was informational and intended to guide short-term monitoring and planning by district staff.
