Garfield Heights board approves resolution to place 10‑year renewal levy on May ballot amid fiscal concerns

The Garfield Heights City School District Board of Education on Jan. 27 voted unanimously to approve a resolution to place a 10‑year renewal levy on the May 2025 ballot, moving the district one step closer to asking voters to continue funding general operations.

The board approved a resolution “to proceed with the submission … of the question of the renewal of an existing tax levy pursuant to sections 5705.194 to 5705.197 of the Revised Code,” a measure read aloud by a finance staff member during the meeting. The resolution, moved by Ashley Thomas and seconded by Heather Morrison, passed on a 5–0 roll call (Millette King, Heather Morrison, Tendika Cox, Michelle Daniels, Ashley Thomas all voting yes).

Why it matters: district leaders framed the levy as an operational lifeline. The renewal requests $5,350,000 annually for 10 years, estimated by the county fiscal officer to average about 9.63 mills and to cost roughly $337 per $100,000 of taxable value; board discussion and staff statements emphasized that the measure is a renewal, not an increase. Superintendent Dr. Reynolds and finance staff said failure to renew would force difficult choices, including shifting non‑instructional programs to a “pay to play” model and reducing community services supported by the district.

Board discussion and staff analysis

Mr. Oko, a finance staff member who read the ballot language to the board, explained the levy language and estimated tax impact. Dr. Reynolds told the board, “we are committed to our students. And whatever our situation is, we will do our best to maintain, but it will be tough,” framing potential program reductions as real possibilities if the renewal does not pass.

Finance staff described an immediate funding pressure unrelated to the levy ballot timeline: the district is behind on state reporting after switching student‑information systems to Infinite Campus. The finance staff member said fatal errors in the state submission process are blocking recognition of some students for state funding and that the district is working multiple times a day to correct records. The staff member said federal grants reimbursements are also slow (about 34% of federal project cash requests reimbursed to date), and county tax advances this year were lower than usual, contributing to a tighter cash position.

Board members pressed for clarity about what would be cut if the levy fails. Michelle Daniels and other trustees noted that extracurriculars, athletics and arts are often the first areas considered for reduction; the district’s finance staff concurred that non‑core programs would be immediately on the table. Dr. Reynolds and other speakers stressed the district’s broader community role — food bank services, Music Express program funding, and other non‑instructional supports — and said those could be affected by funding shortfalls.

Levy and tax details cited in meeting

- Levy amount: $5,350,000 (renewal) - Estimated rate: ~9.63 mills (county fiscal officer estimate) - Estimated cost: ~$337 per $100,000 of taxable value - Duration: 10 years, commencing 2025 and due in calendar year 2026 - Statutory citation read at the meeting: Sections 5705.194 to 5705.197 of the Ohio Revised Code

Votes at a glance (formal actions recorded at the meeting)

- Motion to adopt the meeting agenda as presented — Moved: Michelle Daniels; Second: Tendika Cox; Outcome: approved (King, Morrison, Cox, Daniels, Thomas — all yes). - Motion to approve minutes of Dec. 9 and Dec. 16, 2024 — Moved: Ashley Thomas; Second: Heather Morrison; Outcome: approved (all yes). - Motion to waive reading of agenda items 8.1–8.3 — Moved: Ashley Thomas; Second: Heather Morrison; Outcome: approved (all yes). - Motion to approve revised board meeting date (agenda item 9.1) — Moved: Ashley Thomas; Second: Tendika Cox; Outcome: approved (all yes). - Motion to waive reading of agenda item 10.1 (listed as 10.115 in packet) — Moved: Heather Morrison; Second: Ashley Thomas; Outcome: approved (all yes). - Motion to waive reading of agenda item 16.1 — Moved: Ashley Thomas; Second: Heather Morrison; Outcome: approved (all yes). - Motion to approve Resolution 17.1 (renewal levy submission to electors) — Moved: Ashley Thomas; Second: Heather Morrison; Outcome: approved (all yes). - Motion to accept donated books and related donated items (donations from Pastor Mark Stevens/Sanctuary Baptist Church and Class of 1974) — Moved: Michelle Daniels; Second: Tendika Cox; Outcome: approved (all yes). - Motion to enter executive session to consider personnel matters (employee evaluation/compensation) — Moved: Michelle Daniels; Second: Heather Morrison; Outcome: approved; board entered executive session at 7:12 p.m.; no action to be taken on exit (all yes).

What board members and staff emphasized

Board members repeatedly returned to two themes: (1) urgency of correcting the state reporting errors tied to the Infinite Campus conversion so the district receives owed state revenue, and (2) the immediate fiscal consequence to students and the community if the renewal fails. Finance staff explained that some county actions (lower-than-normal tax advances this year) have reduced expected cash on hand and that the county’s refusal to adjust millage advances this year contributed to the district’s tight cash flow.

The board also clarified that the levy before voters is a renewal for operations (salaries, benefits, utilities, programming) and is separate from the bond millage that funded construction; trustees noted the bond millage comes off the books next year.

Context and next steps

Board members and staff said this Jan. 27 vote is the board’s formal step to place a renewal on the May ballot and that messaging to the community will emphasize that the measure is a renewal (not an increase) and that some programs may be reduced without it. The board and administration will continue to work to correct state reporting errors and to coordinate public information about the levy and its estimated tax impact.

Ending note: multiple trustees and the superintendent urged community support for student programs, stressing the district’s role in providing recurring services to both students and residents beyond classroom instruction.