Treasurer warns state property-tax reforms could shave millions from Marysville forecast

Treasurer Johnson delivered a detailed financial briefing to the Marysville Exempted Village Board of Education on Jan. 15 that combined State Department of Education CUP-report comparisons and an analysis of recent state property-tax reforms.

Johnson said Marysville's revenue per pupil was materially below the statewide average; he cited a state revenue-per-pupil figure near $18,300 and Marysville at about $12,700, placing Marysville among the lowest in the state on that metric. He noted expenditure-per-pupil and student'teacher-ratio benchmarks (Marysville cited at 26 students per teacher vs. a statewide average of 20) and said those numbers inform the district's five-year forecast.

Johnson then described how newly enacted Republican-majority bills limit how much valuation-driven increases a district can keep. He identified House Bill 186 and related measures using a GDP-deflator to cap growth at districts on the 20-mill floor and said HB 335/related language applies comparable caps to inside mills. He said House Bill 129 counts emergency levies toward the 20-mill floor, which could remove a district'level advantage previously tied to emergency levies during reappraisal years.

"That is going to add another variation to forecasting because that GDP factor is going to change," Johnson said, describing the caps as "phantom revenue" that reduce both local receipts and state-share calculations. He estimated the net local-revenue impact for Marysville at roughly $2,850,000 in the near forecast and warned of another potential loss of about $2.5 million after the 2028 reappraisal under the new rules.

Board members asked technical questions about how the GDP deflator is calculated, what years it uses and whether projections would show the impact on first-half versus second-half tax bills. Johnson said the new caps apply to reappraisal cycles and that the second-half tax bill will receive a credit to reflect the new law; he recommended additional forecasting updates (February and a likely May update) as Department of Taxation credits and guidance become more certain.

Several board members reacted strongly, with one member (Mister Keller) saying he was "angry" and planned to use his seat to advocate for state-level school funding reform. The board agreed to monitor forecasts and consider state-level advocacy as needed; no formal board action on legislation was taken that night.

Johnson closed by recommending ongoing monitoring and promising a refined five-year forecast at the district's February meeting and an updated forecast in May if additional Department of Taxation guidance is released.