Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Budget And Levy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sylvania board hears financial briefing, weighs 7.9‑mill property levy and two income‑tax options to close $18M gap
Summary
At a June 8 meeting the Sylvania Board of Education heard a detailed financial presentation showing multi‑year deficits and a fund balance that could be exhausted by FY2029; administrators presented three ballot options (a 7.9‑mill property levy, a "75 traditional" income tax and a 1% earned‑income option) and scheduled special meetings to finalize resolutions.
On June 8, 2026 the Sylvania Board of Education received a multi‑year financial report laying out options to close a roughly $18 million revenue gap and avoid steep service cuts.
Adam, the district’s finance presenter, told trustees the district expects current‑year deficit spending of about $3.3 million and said, "our fund balance is fully depleted uh by fiscal year 29," warning that doing nothing would produce growing deficits beyond that year. He laid out three ballot options the district is considering: a 7.9‑mill property tax levy, a so‑called "75 traditional" income tax (described by the presenter as a traditional income tax option that the presentation estimated would generate about $22.5 million, with a 2‑mill property rollback to reach a roughly $18 million net), and a 1% earned‑income option (narrower base, with an estimated net near $18.2 million when paired with a 1‑mill rollback).
The presenter explained differences in timing and base: income tax collections come in more slowly during the first year because of quarterly remittance and employer setup; Social Security income would remain exempt under the options discussed. The district’s forecast shows each route would substantially reduce projected multi‑year deficits but that the timing of collections and early‑year cash flow would differ between property and income tax approaches.
Board members pressed for details about how county mill reductions would be implemented and which income sources would be included or exempt. Trustees also discussed community sentiment after a failed May property‑tax campaign and debated whether to survey residents or use focus groups and targeted outreach before the board commits to a single ballot question. Administrators cautioned about legal and sampling limitations for quick surveys during the summer.
Administrators said the board must pass initial resolutions in time to meet an August 5 procedural deadline; trustees set a series of special meetings (June 22, June 29, July 1 and July 16) to flesh out numbers and decide which option to place before voters.
Next steps: district staff will prepare resolution drafts for the property and both income‑tax options, obtain updated revenue estimates from county and state tax offices, and present final language for the board to act on at the late‑June/early‑July meetings.
