Bowling Green school district is asking for a raise – the first one in 14 years.
At Thursday’s meeting, the board voted 4-1 to place a 0.75% continuing income tax on the ballot in November.
Peggy Thompson cast the no vote.
The funds are needed to help keep the district operating in the black past fiscal year 2028-29.
Board member Ardy Gonyer compared the district to a homeowner who has not gotten a raise in 14 years but whose household expenses continue to increase.
The last time the district asked for new money was in 2010.
Matt Feasel, who will start as the district’s treasurer Aug. 1, presented a financial analysis showing what he projected would be collected – and the future financial health – of a 0.25%, 0.50%, 0.75% and a 1% income tax.
It’s no secret we need additional revenue for operating funds, Feasel said.
“We want Bowling Green to be a destination district. We want individuals to come back to Bowling Green,” he said.
Feasel said he did a little tweaking to the five-year forecast presented by previous Treasurer Cathy Schuller.
He looked at historical numbers and projected average revenue growth of 2% and average expenditure growth of 4% for the next six years.
It takes three years for an income tax to reach 100% collection and the revenue fluctuates. Last year collection of the district’s current 0.50% income tax was down 3.1% but two years ago it was up 16%.
Feasel has projected a growth rate for an income tax of 2%.
The district started using its cash reserves in fiscal year 2022-23 and without new revenue, it will use up those reserves is fiscal year 2027-28 as it continues to spend more than it is takes in.
Feasel said the 0.25% income tax would collect $2.3 million in three years and is projected to grow to $2.7 million in six years – but the district would run out of money in fiscal year 2029-30 as it continues to dip into its cash reserves.
“It won’t be enough,” Feasel said.
The 0.50% income tax would collect $4.8 million in the third year and $5.6 million in six years. The district would continue to use its cash balance to cover the deficit spending.
The .75% would collect $7.3 million in the third year and would allow the district to build its reserves through fiscal year 2030-31 when it is projected to collect $8.6 million.
The 1% income tax would generate $11.5 million and create a cash balance of $35.4 million in six years.
“That is not responsible, and I would not recommend that,” Feasel said.
He said he favored a 0.75% income tax “based on today’s numbers.”
Board member Norm Geer asked if Feasel would recommend a renewable or a continuing tax.
“The need is not going to go away but it’s tougher to get a continuing passed,” he said. “If you’re going to do it, continuing is the way to go.”
Board President Tracy Hovest said they have been working on passing continuing levies to provide stability.
She said the board has been talking for the past four years about the need for new money.
“It’s pretty clear we need to do something,” Gonyer said.
The last thing we want to do is go back to the voters in a couple of years, he said, and added he favored the 0.75% tax but was open to either a renewable or continuing term.
Thompson said she would prefer to hold off and allow the district to be more transparent.
“I understand the issue, but there is money sitting there that can tide us over,” she said.
Pipeline money will soften the blow, and getting kids to come into the district and bring state monies with them would be helpful, Feasel said.
Thompson also said there may be room to cut expenses without cutting programs.
“People I’ve been talking to are tired of being asked for more money,” she said.
Geer said the district has talked about balancing the tax burden, which currently leans heavily on real estate, and an income tax will create more equity.
“The income tax gives us the ability to have increases in revenues,” he said. “It’s a sensible way to keep up with inflation.”
He pointed out the district has not asked for new money in 14 years.
“I think we’ve been very good stewards of the taxpayers’ money,” said board member Ryan Myers.
He said he also was in favor of the 0.75% tax but was undecided on the term.
Hovest addressed comments made by district resident Steve Bateson, who pointed out there were 332 fewer students in the district since the 2019-20 school year but staffing levels have stayed the same.
Hovest said student needs have grown since the pandemic and she used nurses as an example, stating there used to be two in the district but now there is one in every building.
“I’m not suggesting we have too much staffing, but I think it’s something to look at,” Bateson said, and asked what the district was going to do to get those students back.
He said the community needs to recognize changes in the district, including new leadership, different administration, a bond issue that passed for new facilities and what makes Bowling Green City Schools unique.
“If you’re going to try to pass something, you have to have all the facts out there because people are going to question things that I just brought up,” he said.
Hovest said she was not willing to cut services provided to students and she accepted Feasel’s recommendation of .75% for a continuing term to provide financial stability.
The board passed a resolution to ask the department of taxation for the actual numbers generated from a 0.75% income tax and in July will pass another resolution to put it on the Nov. 5 ballot.
“Going on 14 years without new money is a long time,” said Superintendent Ted Haselman.
