Superintendent Tom Hosler presents ballot options at Monday’s board of education meeting and board members Sue Larimer, center, and Lori Reffert listen.
PERRYSBURG – Perrysburg Schools may ask taxpayers to support a fourth incremental levy.
At its meeting Monday, the board spent more than two hours discussing its levy options.
The board was given five options, but members could not agree on one.
Members will hold a special meeting June 27 at 6 p.m. to continue the discussion.
The board needs a super majority of four votes for passage and Wood County Board of Elections needs the resolution by Aug. 7.
The district has a levy with an effective millage of 9.75, which is the last collection of the incremental levy passed in 2019, that will expire at the end of this year. The tax collects $13,542,652 for the district.
At the end of this year, 1.85 mills will retire from the construction of the high school. Final collection will be in 2025.
The five options include:
A. Renew the expiring 9.75-mill levy for four years, which will result in no new funds to match student growth and result in $3 million in cuts for the 2025-26 school year.
“At this point, all we’re trying to do is tread water,” said Treasurer Randy Drewyor.
The cuts would enable the district to operate until the 2028-29 school year. Another $5 million in cuts would be needed in 2029-30 to begin the next school year with a balanced budget but with no cash reserves.
A.1. Renew the 9.75-mill levy for a continuing term and request an additional levy or 1.27-1.75 mills in 2027. There would be no new funds to address student growth.
B. Replace the levy with a six-year incremental levy that will grow by $1.5 million per year. This is a replica of the 2019 incremental levy, which expires this year. This plan would maintain a positive cash balance through 2029-30.
The millage would start at 10.85 and grow to 15.25 and cost the owner of a home assessed at $200,000 an additional $6.30 per month.
“As a school district we have used this repeatedly,” Superintendent Tom Hosler said about the incremental levy.
The district passed incremental levies in 2008, 2012 and 2019, he said.
C. Replace the levy with a six-year incremental levy that will grow by $2 million per year. This would match student growth and keep the district operating in the black through 2030-31. It also may delay the need to return to voters.
The millage structure would start at 11.19 mills and grow to 16.95 mills in 2029. The cost of the owner of a home assessed at $200,000 is $8.40 per month.
D. Replace the levy with an eight-year incremental levy with a growth of $2 million per year. This option also would match growth and maintain a positive cash balance through 2030-31. It would start at 11.19 mills and end in 2031 at 19.83 mills. It would cost a homeowner with a home assessed at $200,000 an additional $8.40 per month.
As long as the school district continues to grow, the incremental aspect of the levy is absorbed by the new residents, Hosler said.
“We need to bring this decision to closure,” said board President Eric Benington.
The board started the discussion at its May meeting and continued it at their work session earlier this month.
Board member Sue Larimar said Option A was a “flat out no. That would fundamentally change our district.”
She said it was irresponsible to not ask for the money that is needed to accommodate growth and an incremental levy is the best way to do that.
Board member Laura Meinke, however, favored Option A.
“We need to give a little to get a little,” she said.
This year’s taxes were a shock to taxpayers with the revaluation and there is no relief in sight for property valuations, she said.
“The district has to look at areas we can tighten,” she said, and added she wants a levy that will pass, because if it doesn’t, “the cuts we will have to make won’t be pretty.”
Failure at the polls could require the loss of 130 employees, Hosler said.
A list of projected $2.7 million in reductions discussed in 2019 prior to passage of that year’s levy included all clubs and sports; music, business, industrial tech and gifted teachers; reading specialists; and cuts in transportation.
“I was not elected to hatchet or take apart our district,” said board member Lori Reffert. “We’re here to make sure every one of our students is successful.”
She cited Perrysburg’s home values compared to other districts; houses are still selling quickly.
Benington pointed out making cuts will impact retention and recruitment while Hosler said it would be challenging to ask for funds when knowing you’re going to make cuts.
Reffert said she was wavering between options C and D; option A wasn’t even under consideration.
Benington said he favored C as it gives the voters control and the district what it needs; D provides lack of accountability for future boards.
“Voters do want and deserve some say in how this district spends money,” he said. “Being on the ballot every four years or more doesn’t serve us when it comes to planning.”
Board member Susan Rowland Miller agreed that option A was not feasible and said option D was the more responsible and intellectual.
Meinke reminded the board of the need for a bond issue to address the overcrowding and once again said there were areas that can be cut.
Residents are going to have to make a choice if they want to pay for education or household bills, she said.
“When it’s necessary, it’s necessary,” she said about potential cuts.
“I’ve got to disagree with that. I’m not going to do anything … to change the fabric of this community,” Benington said.
Reffert asked Meinke if she was willing to cut high school busing to save $900,000.
“It’s not easy and it’s not pretty, but sometimes it has to be done,” Meinke said.
