Westerville board votes to place up-to-4.9‑mill operating levy on May ballot

The Westerville City Schools Board of Education voted unanimously to approve a resolution of necessity to submit an operating levy question not to exceed 4.9 mills to voters in May. The board approved the measure 6‑0 after a work‑session review of updated forecasts and austerity scenarios.

Superintendent Angie Hamburg said the district is under a tight timeline to act: "we are on a pretty tight timeline," noting the district must file resolutions by Feb. 5 if it intends to appear on the May ballot. Staff presented three scenarios that compared (a) no new levy, (b) a 4.9‑mill operating levy and (c) a 5.9‑mill operating levy alongside identified budget reductions implemented since the November levy failure.

Why it matters: District finance staff told the board that even with $4.8 million in reductions already implemented and additional proposed austerity measures, the five‑year forecast still shows deficit pressure. Staff recommended asking voters for an operating levy at no more than 4.9 mills and continuing to pursue internal cost reductions, primarily through attrition and targeted personnel actions.

Key details from the presentation: staff reported $4.8 million in current‑year reductions already committed; a tier‑1 personnel target of about $3.0 million in recurring salaries/benefits savings; elimination of a $65,000 annual transfer to permanent improvement in the near‑term; a reduction in the forecasted general‑fund support for food service from $100,000 to roughly $70,000 annually; and a one‑time $30 million reclassification back into the general fund that affects the current‑year appearance of the budget. Staff also showed a measure of operating cost: approximately $634,000 per day to run the district in fiscal year 2025, rising in the forecast period.

Board members discussed timing and community support. Several trustees said the November ballot outcome indicated voters would not support the larger combined request that had included bond funding, so the board opted to pursue a smaller operating levy without a bond issue. Board members also noted that, under the 4.9‑mill scenario, the district would remain above its 90‑day unreserved fund balance target through 2029 but could fall below that target (to about 64 days) in the fifth year of the forecast if assumptions do not change.

The board took formal action at agenda item 10.02. Motion text on the record: "to approve the resolution of necessity of levy of a tax in excess of the 10‑mill limitation and to submit the question of the same to the electors at a rate not to exceed 4.9 mills." The roll call vote was recorded as: Christy Meyer — yes; Anissa LeVan — yes; Louise Valentine — yes; Altman — yes; Davidson — yes; (Marshall) — yes. The board’s vote was unanimous, 6‑0.

Next steps: the board directed staff to file the resolution with the county auditor so the auditor can certify rates, and staff said it will return to the board with budget updates in March and prepare materials for a May ballot campaign if the board remains committed to the timeline. The board also discussed planning to return to voters again in 2028 if revenue pressures persist.

Ending: The board's unanimous vote starts the statutory process to place the operating levy on the May ballot; staff indicated materials for public information and further budget deliberations will follow at upcoming meetings.