Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

According to the paper this morning, there will be no levy on the ballot in August. The school board decided to wait until November to try again and pass the operating levy.

What do you think? Will it pass or will it fail?

By Central Mom

Just the facts please.

Could we try to get some real facts here about the most recent operating levy to fail at the polls on May 8th?

As was posted earlier that levy was originally passed in 1993. The PLSD started collecting the property taxes in 1994. The voted millage was 5 mills. The property valuation of the district has increased dramatically since 1993. The EFFECTIVE millage currently is at 2.8 mills.

In the Dispatch this morning they said the levy would expire soon.

Now here are the questions:

1. With the total assessed value of the district at $1 Billion and the effective millage at 2.8 mills that would calculate out to around $2.8 million in revenue for this levy. I take it, that if the levy expires then the district loses the $2.8 Million coming in from this levy or a real reduction in the district's revenues.

2. How many times has this levy been renewed over the last 14 years?

3. If issue 3 had passed would that have made this levy permanent?

4. When does this levy expire?

Thanks to anyone who hnows tha answers.

Answers to questions

According to what I read throughout the Issue 3 campaign, here?’s what I know:

1. YES ?– Currently the District is collecting approximately $2.8 million in property taxes from this levy. If it fails in November, the District then loses the $2.8 million in 2008.

2. Voters have approved the renewal of this levy twice since it was originally approved in 1993.

3. YES ?– Issue 3 was a permanent replacement operating levy.

4. The existing 5-mill levy expires on December 31, 2007.

More questions

Thank you for the prompt reply

Now let me take the liberty to show you what the issue 3 committee was saying about this levy renewal. This comes right off of the flyer that was hung on my door.

Issue 3 is a 5 mill levy that replaces constant dollars approved in 1993 with inflation adjusted dollars needed today.

When the original levy passed in 1993, enrollment was approximately 5000 students. Today?’s enrollment is just above 10,000. That?’s a 100% increase in enrollment in 14 years - versus 0% increase in operating revenues over the same period of time.

Remember - bonds are for building. Levies are for learning. By law the district cannot spend any bond money on operating expenses.

Proceeds from an operating levy are spent on operating costs. These costs include classroom textbooks and materials, technology upgrades, books for libraries, staff salaries and benefits.

Issue 3 will cost an additional $68.56 per year per $100,000 of assessed property valuation (or less than $6 per month)

?“Issue 3 is a 5 mill levy that replaces constant dollars approved in 1993 with inflation adjusted dollars needed today.?”
THE TRUTH OF THE ABOVE STATEMENT GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT THE LEVY HAD NOT BEEN RENEWED SINCE 1993.

?“When the original levy passed in 1993, enrollment was approximately 5000 students. Today?’s enrollment is just above 10,000. That?’s a 100% increase in enrollment in 14 years - versus 0% increase in operating revenues over the same period of time.?”
THE ABOVE STATEMENT FUTHER STATES THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO RENEWALS ON THIS LEVY WHEN IN FACT YOU STATE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN RENEWALS.

THEN THERE IS THE ?“IT WILL COST?” THE OWNER OF A $100,000 HOME. I DOUBT ANY EXIST IN THE PLSD ANYMORE.
In the Dispatch this morning and during this entire campaign I have not heard anyone say that if this levy fails it will reduce the school operating income by $2.8 Million.

WHY?

I also want to comment on the order of costs listed on the flyer. You all list the staff salaries and benefits last in what the operating money is spent on. Since salaries are around 80% to 85% of the operating budget shouldn?’t these costs be listed FIRST?

So let?’s factor in the impact for salaries:

In 14 years we have doubled the number of students in our schools. Have we doubled the number of staff? Have the inflationary pressures of their salaries increased in a straight line or in the case of your flyer just doubled? I bet that line has an sharp upward exponential curve to it. Has the total number of staff simply doubled in those 14 years? Or has the district become more efficient and have less than doubled the staff?