Superintendent lays out November levy options as Parma City faces budget gap

Superintendent Dr. Hunt urged the Parma City School District Board of Education on June 25 to begin firming up plans for a possible November ballot measure to bring new operating revenue to the district.

Dr. Hunt told trustees the district has only two broad mechanisms to generate operating revenue: property tax and a school district income tax. He said the May income‑tax proposal failed, leaving the district to consider alternatives ahead of the November election window. "We only have two mechanisms to generate revenue. One is property tax and the other is what we attempted to do in May and that was a school district income tax," Dr. Hunt said during his presentation.

The superintendent presented three modeled income‑tax scenarios and rough revenue estimates from the department of taxation: a 0.25% rate (generally producing several million dollars), a 0.5% rate (about $14.1 million) and a 0.75% rate (about $21.4 million). Dr. Hunt also recapped the May request structure that would have paired a 1.75% income‑tax ask with giving back the three emergency levies — a package that, if approved previously, would have netted roughly $10 million after the levy tradeoffs.

Board members pressed staff on timing and tradeoffs. Trustees were reminded the board must pass two July resolutions (a necessity resolution and a proceed‑to‑election resolution) and meet an Aug. 5 deadline to place a question on the ballot; the district's five‑year forecast, due Aug. 31, will determine how deeply forecasts project deficits or reserves. Dr. Hunt emphasized the board's policy goal to maintain a cash reserve equivalent to 60 days of the prior fiscal year's operating expenses — roughly $25 million — and warned that without new revenue the district's budget picture will change materially by 2029.

Trustees debated whether to request a continuous levy or a term‑limited levy (five or 10 years), and discussed community engagement plans including facilitated town halls and an online survey to broaden input beyond typical public‑meeting attendees. Several trustees said they preferred to schedule a work session within one to two weeks to review scenarios, ask detailed questions about revenue projections and consider term limits before committing to a final rate to certify.

Next steps: the board will consider scheduling a work session to review modeled scenarios, await the department of taxation's certification of projected collections for chosen rates, and watch the August five‑year forecast to inform whether to place a measure on the November ballot.