Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Levy Submission topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cincinnati board rescinds earned-income tax resolution and votes to pursue 7‑mill property levy
Summary
After more than two hours of public comment and board debate, the Cincinnati Public Schools Board voted to rescind its prior decision to submit a 0.75% school income tax and approved proceeding with a 7‑mill property tax levy for the November ballot (5‑1‑1).
The Cincinnati Public Schools Board of Education on Aug. 3 voted to rescind its earlier resolution to submit a 0.75% school income tax to voters and approved a new resolution to proceed with a 7‑mill property tax levy for the November ballot.
The motion to rescind the income‑tax submission carried 6 to 1 after extended public comment and board discussion; later, the motion to proceed with submission of a 7‑mill property tax passed with five votes in favor, one no and one abstention. Treasurer Mike Guston read the results: "5 votes in favor, 1 no, and 1 abstention." The rescission and the new resolution were taken under the board's procedural rules after members acknowledged intense community feedback this week.
Board members and district leaders framed the shift as a response to community concerns and a practical attempt to preserve the district's finances. Vice President Moffitt said she had spent the week listening to teachers, parents, city and county leaders and would "support rescinding the earned income levy if we have collaborative conversations with our city" to pursue a sustainable, long‑term funding strategy. President Craig opened the floor for motions and managed the procedural steps that led to the final votes.
Supporters of the change pointed to broad calls from teachers, labor groups and parents at public comment for a property levy rather than an earned‑income tax. Union leaders including Julie Sellers of the Cincinnati Federation of Teachers and other speakers told the board the earned‑income proposal would place the heaviest burden on wage earners while letting property owners and portfolios avoid increased contributions.
The board directed staff to proceed with administrative steps to place the 7‑mill property levy on the November ballot and to provide the public with clear information about the levy plan and how new revenue would be spent. The board set the procedural threshold for passing a levy submission at five affirmative votes and asked staff to formalize timelines and next steps with the treasurer's office.
