Mount Vernon City Schools to pursue 1% earned‑income levy for November; special meeting set June 24

Mount Vernon City Schools officials agreed at a June 15 board meeting to pursue placing a 1% earned‑income tax on the November ballot, with a 30‑year limit and allocation to current expense, and scheduled a special board meeting for June 24 to adopt the first legal resolution.

The board’s discussion followed a narrow May defeat: “we came up 115 shy,” Superintendent Bill Fry said, describing the margin that prompted the board to consider a second attempt and seek consultants’ advice on timing and messaging. The district expects certification work from the county tax commissioner and legal steps that must be completed this summer if the board wants a November referendum.

Why it matters: the board’s tax‑policy work envisions using an earned‑income revenue stream to support long‑term facility financing and operations. Advisors told the board a 1% rate over a 30‑year financing window could support roughly $115 million of borrowing under conservative assumptions; that sum is intended to cover the capital projects the district previously outlined and to preserve operating flexibility.

Bond counsel Alison Migley (Squire Patton Box) walked the board through statutory filing deadlines and the required two‑step process: the first resolution must be adopted and sent to the tax commissioner roughly 100 days before the election (practically July 24), then a second resolution must be filed with the board of elections by the 90‑day deadline (around Aug. 5). Migley advised a short special meeting in late June to adopt the first resolution and allow the tax commissioner the required certification time.

David (advisor to the district) reviewed the policy tradeoffs that shaped the original proposal: a continuing tax provides longer‑term borrowing flexibility and a steady revenue stream for maintenance and debt service, while a fixed‑term levy can be a voter concession but reduces borrowing capacity. Using a conservative 6% interest assumption, the advisor estimated a 30‑year, 1% income tax could yield a borrowing capacity in the neighborhood of $115 million; a shorter term (e.g., 25 years) would reduce that amount.

Market context: Emily Cannon, speaking for PNC, told the board municipal markets have been volatile but that comparable recent school financings had lower overall interest costs than the conservative 6% example. “I can’t predict the market,” Cannon said, noting municipal demand remained healthy but rates can move with national and geopolitical developments.

Board decision and next steps: without a formal final vote on levy terms at the June 15 meeting, the board signaled consensus around filing for a 1% earned‑income tax limited to 30 years and allocated to current expense, and directed staff and counsel to prepare the language for the two required resolutions. A special board meeting was set for Wednesday, June 24 at 10:00 a.m. at the central office to adopt the first resolution and submit it to the tax commissioner for certification.

The board emphasized it will refine campaign messaging and outreach (targeting mailers, social media, in‑person events and public forums) while observing legal limits on district communications; campaign activity by a citizens’ committee would handle persuasive messaging outside the factual materials the district may provide.

If the board files for a November election and the tax commissioner issues the certifications within the statutory window, the district will appear on the November ballot; the board said it will return to the public with clearer outreach focused on project needs and limits if the resolution process proceeds.