The $10.4 million requested for each of the next five years was recommended by a citizen advisory group. The group of local business and civic leaders made it’s recommendation after studying the district’s books and five year forecast.
“They felt comfortable where we were heading,” board member Mick Lundy said. “I feel we can get this levy passed.”
The board in May placed a 6.7-mill levy emergency levy on the August ballot but later pulled the measure to wait to see what changes the state General Assembly would make to education funding. The district will receive a 1.38 percent increase ($137,757) in the 2014 fiscal year, and 2.45 percent ($238,196) more in fiscal year 2015.
Even with those increases, the district would start the 2015 fiscal year with around $5.6 million in the bank, not enough to open the schools for 2015/16 school year, according Stephen Maag, the district’s treasurer.
“We were not the recipients of significant funds,” Maag said of the state increase..
Voters have not approved new operating money for the district in 10 years. The district has been making up the difference between its rising costs and stagnant revenue by using reserve funds and cutting costs. The district has trimmed almost $13 million in costs through staff attrition from retirement and resignation, cutting programs and other cost-savings measures.
Board member Kim Grant said the request for operating money is needed. “If we go lower, what district would we be? We have 12 consecutive years of Excellent rating. I do not want to go lower,” she said.
District voters have defeated four consecutive operating levies since May 2011. The most recent was last November — a 6.7 mill emergency operating levy. The levy narrowly was defeated 50.3 percent to 49.6 percent
Voters approved an $84 million bond request in 2008 for construction of two new school buildings and renovation of eight existing schools. That bond money only can be used for construction and not any operating costs.
The board also spent just over an hour in executive session discussing contract negotiations with the Beavercreek Education Association. On Monday, the teachers group rejected a proposed contract. Neither side would comment other than to say negotiations will continue.
About the Author