Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sycamore board coalesces behind property-tax levy; staff to draft formal resolutions
Summary
After months of study and public input, the Sycamore Board of Education agreed to pursue a property-tax levy that would split permanent-improvement and operating millage and asked staff to prepare a resolution of necessity and millage models for the next meeting.
The Sycamore Board of Education on Monday signaled consensus to pursue a property-tax levy, directing district staff to model exact millage and to prepare a formal "resolution of necessity" for a future meeting.
The board’s discussion, which followed public comments and several work sessions, centered on whether to place a traditional property-tax millage on the ballot or a 1% earned-income tax. Administration told the board the district is "state-minimum funded" and that most revenue comes from local property taxes; staff said a property-tax approach permits a clearer split between permanent improvements and operating costs.
Why it matters: Board members said a property-tax levy would let voters see a designated permanent-improvement (PI) fund and an operating portion. "We want to be able to say x mills goes toward permanent improvement and x mills goes to operating," one member said during the discussion. Staff noted an example model that would yield about $5.4 million annually for PI using roughly 1.95 mills, with the remainder allocated to operations, but said exact figures must be confirmed.
Board debate focused on timing, equity and administrative mechanics. Supporters argued a property-tax levy is better understood by residents and can be framed to include businesses; skeptics said an earned-income tax could relieve property owners but raised questions about revenue flow, ballot language and how quickly funds would be available. The treasurer explained that an EIT ballot must specify a dollar amount to the Ohio Department of Taxation, which will round to a percentage, and that 1% EIT is roughly equivalent to about 6.95–7 mills in modeling presented to the board.
Public comment at the meeting tied into the levy debate. Second-grade teacher Josh Becker said he supports a levy but urged the board to protect classroom staffing: "Smaller groups in second grade is the most direct investment we can make in how our kids walk into third grade academically and emotionally," he said. Another community member, Jenny Barker, asked why the district would seek local levied dollars if state funding has increased by about $2.9–3.1 million, noting she had seen the differing figures in district materials.
What’s next: The board asked administration and the treasurer to confirm the PI amount and operating needs, to draft the set of resolutions and to return with precise millage options and legal language at the next board meeting to meet statutory filing deadlines. The board did not adopt a formal levy resolution at Monday’s meeting but gave staff direction to prepare the necessary paperwork.
