Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Levy Communication topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public speaker lays out financial case for renewing Little Miami emergency levy; board questions social media wording
Summary
An audience member gave detailed fiscal data supporting renewing the district's emergency levy now; board members questioned who authorized a recent levy-related social media post and whether it omitted timing that could mislead voters. The superintendent cited Ohio auditor guidance allowing factual communications.
A member of the public used the Oct. 28 Little Miami Local School District meeting to present data urging support for renewing the district’s emergency levy and to explain why seeking renewal now could protect taxpayer credits.
The speaker (identified in the transcript only as Speaker 10) said the emergency levy passed in 2011 took the district out of fiscal emergency and generates about $10.6 million annually for the district. He said the levy was passed at 13.95 mills and will next be collected at an estimated 5.72 mills under current calculations. The speaker also noted the district’s enrollment grew from roughly 3,800 in 2011 to about 5,900 today, an increase of roughly 57 percent, and warned that state funding changes could reduce district revenue if the levy is not renewed now.
"The state's giving us less and less in their own funding model and funding vouchers more," the speaker said, adding that failing to renew this year could cost the district millions in lost credits over a five‑year period.
Earlier in the meeting a board member asked who authorized a recent district social‑media post about an "expiring levy," arguing the wording omitted that the levy does not actually expire until the following year and could mislead voters. The superintendent read guidance from the Ohio auditor saying school districts may share factual information about levies via email or social media provided the communication does not advocate for or against the levy. "You are more than welcome to put facts out," the superintendent said, quoting the auditor's updated guidance (July 2025).
Board members debated whether material distributed by the district should include fuller timing details so voters understand when a levy will take effect or expire. One board member said failing to include that the levy does not expire until a later year "lacks transparency" and could be perceived as trying to "dupe" voters.
What happens next: The public commentary and the auditor guidance were recorded in the meeting minutes; no board action regarding a change to levy communications was taken at the Oct. 28 meeting.
