Board hears strategic‑plan update from consultants and begins public levy conversation

Consultants from Bellwether and Rice Education Consulting gave the board a progress update on Cincinnati Public Schools’ strategic plan and outlined next steps for measurable goals and financial modeling on June 8.

Bellwether/Rice presented a draft graduate profile that envisions graduates “believing in their own potential” and prepared for college, career or military service. The consultants also proposed an intended impact statement by 2030 — that every student is known by name, taught by a consistent and excellent educator and supported to stay, grow and graduate prepared for opportunity — and four emerging strategic priorities: strengthening instructional consistency and K–12 pathways; building coordinated student supports; strengthening talent systems and professional learning; and improving central‑office decision and implementation capacity.

Consultants said these anchors would be translated into specific lagging and leading indicators (for example: third‑grade reading proficiency, algebra completion, attendance and graduation rates) and that the next phase will align measurable SMART goals with financial models. Board members repeatedly asked that the workgroups that translate priorities into initiatives include community and school‑level voices in addition to central office staff.

Treasurer Gustin presented the district’s revenue outlook and levy options, saying state property‑tax reform and allocation changes have flattened local revenue and made future years uncertain. Gustin outlined a three‑tier levy timing strategy: an operational “now” levy to launch and sustain year‑one work; a 2029 ballot (when a current emergency levy expires) that could be framed as a referendum on the strategic plan; and a 2031 bond/built‑facilities conversation tied to the end of the current facilities‑debt schedule.

The treasurer and finance staff showed levy sizing scenarios (example five‑year block proposals with varying millage) and explained the administrative calendar (resolution of necessity in June, resolution to proceed by July to meet county deadlines) and asked the board to consider a five‑year block approach that front‑loads reserves in years one and two and spends down in later years. The administration also discussed using COPS (cash‑flow / capital‑project borrowing) prudently to accelerate high‑priority facility repairs if voters support an operating levy and the district maintains suitable debt capacity.

Board members debated income tax versus property tax proposals and whether joining the Oaks joint vocational district (which would add roughly two mills for those services) should be part of the discussion. Several board members said any levy request must be linked to a small set of clearly communicated priorities and measurable outcomes; one board member requested a written commitment from the board and union leadership to support implementation if a levy passes. Treasurer Gustin and the consultants committed to produce financial scenarios and measurable targets to inform a June 22 finance committee recommendation.

Board members asked for robust community messaging and for the finance committee to evaluate levy structuring, timing and the potential use of COPS or combination levies. The board left the session with the finance committee assigned to return specific levy recommendations.