School Funding Matters

Giving Ohioans a voice in shaping the future of public education
Welcome to School Funding Matters
Sign in | Join | Help
Nov 09

The agony of defeat

Published Sunday, November 09, 2008 8:16 PM by Andy Benson

Last week, I wrote about the failure of the Milford school levy by 54 votes in the general election. Milford, a suburb of Cincinnati, was seeking a 5.5 mill operating levy - what would have been its first since 2003. More on that posting. While supporters are waiting to see if the count of provisional ballots on November 25th might put them over the top, they are also scratching their heads to figure out what they need to do - after four past failures - to get the revenue they need to keep the school rated "Excellent" on academics and no longer rated "Fiscal Caution" on finances. More on Milford.

Anyone who has been around a school levy campaign knows this is hard work. It is not just reporting to the public how well you have done and showing the public that you are being responsible with the tax dollars. People vote no for lots of reasons, and people vote yes for lots of reasons, and people stay home and don't vote at all for lots of reasons. In campaigns, you have to find the right message to deliver and then effectively deliver it. That takes time, money, and lots of volunteer effort.

In Milford, they are exhausted.

Below is a letter written shortly after the election Tuesday by Todd Munro, the Milford levy chair, who expresses what I think many of his peers have expressed and will express in the future with a state school funding system that places too much burden on local school districts and communities to pass local levies just to keep up with inflation.

I have been involved with many of the Milford School levies over the past several years - four failures and a potential fifth failure that currently hangs in the balance of a 54 vote differential and the effects of provisional ballots and possible recount.

In the early campaigns, energy was high, volunteers were many, and funding was easily raised. The hope that all of the energy and time would make a difference in the futures of many, and the community at large, was the reason.

After four failures, energy is low, volunteers scarce, and fund raising difficult. The driving force is no longer the hope for the future, but the fear of what will be lost. The efforts of many over the years to create a school district that is doing great things - that is making a difference - could all be lost.

Timing is everything and for our district the timing could not have been worse. We have a new administration and BOE that is working with the community and has put our district back on the right path and corrected many of the wrongs - this should have been our time.

Our campaign this November was no longer about how good a job was being done with the tax payers' dollars or the decisions that were being made by the school district. It became a fight against the economy, foreclosures, healthcare costs, utility costs, job losses, and all of the uncertainties that those things bring - things that are out of the community's and school district's control.

So, pending a miraculous outcome in the provisional ballots and potential recount, our district will face another defeat. Where do we go from here? How do you motivate community members to "try and take the hill" one more time, when they have seen defeat so many times and the taste of victory only 54 votes away?

We should not have to place this burden on our communities. We should not have to pit neighbor against neighbor. We should not have to choose between paying bills and paying for education. There should not be a difference in the level of education that is provided because of a geographical location and the ability of one community to provide more than another. With the current funding system, the number of communities that will be able to continue to provide a quality education, that continues to see increasing costs, standards, and unfunded mandates, will be fewer and fewer.

The funding of education should be like our roads. When they are broke, we fix them. We they are covered in snow, we clear them. When they are maintained, they take us where we want to go. Can you imagine if every time there was a pothole, stoplight repair, or heavy snow that we put the repairs up for a vote? I can hear it now, "I never drive on that road. Why should I have to pay for it."

Education is the foundation of every community. It is the key to job growth, innovation, and future prosperity. It has to be made a priority. Our funding system for education has a pothole and every year that we put off fixing it - it gets bigger and deeper - we need to fix it. There are many that offer suggestions that are beneficial to themselves. The perfect tax is the one that someone else pays. We don't need a funding system that is perfect, just one that is equitable.

Todd Munro

Levy Chair

www.4milford.com

 

Comments

Paul Lambert said:

As I said on an earlier article, the issue of school funding is simple: two of the three partners in the school funding partnership are falling short: the business community and the State of Ohio. The only thing left is to raise taxes on the overwhelmed homeowners and the surviving businesses.

On the spending side, the cost driver is the expectation of teachers, administrators and staff have for compensation and benefits whose costs are growing faster than household incomes.

Those two thing must be brought into alignment if we have any hope of solving school funding in Ohio. We have to raise taxes and/or lower the cost of salaries and benefits of school employees. It's that simple.

There is no magic wand the State can wave to fix the funding side. It has to come from taxes on the citizens and businesses in Ohio, just as it does today. We can try to shift more of it to businesses, and drive more jobs out of Ohio. We can shift the form of taxation from property tax to income taxes. But a tax is a tax is a tax.

We may even need to give up our beloved community school districts and go to a new form of organization that consolidates all schools in an economic zone. But the unspoken truth is that suburbanites want to enjoy their economically segregated schools but aren't willing to pay for them.

We may be about to enter a political era when this kind of stuff is thought about more seriously by our state legislators. We certainly can't stay in this no-man's-land we're caught in right now. I prefer that we eliminate local school districts all together go to a 100% voucher/charter system. Barring that, consolidation of schools by SMSA may be our best options.

November 9, 2008 9:07 PM

Andy Benson said:

Paul Lambert has it partially right. Public education is a state responsibility, and the state has not yet fulfilled that role. The funding system is still too obviously tied to local wealth, which has more often to do with geography than with anything else. Beachwood outside of Cleveland is on the Interstate and became a great place to put office parks and an upscale mall. The revenue from all that accrues to Beachwood City Schools and those students simply because transportation planners routed the Interstate through there.

But I would take issue with the notion that this is a zero sum game. Public education is an investment, not an expense, and thus is undervalued among public spending areas. Of course, the investments need to be targeted to activities that improve education, and the jury is still out whether teacher salaries and benefits are adequate to attract and retain teaching force that include our best and brightest. I know some very talented public school teachers, and I know some who, well, are challenged. So the presumption that we need to ratchet down teacher salaries and benefits could further exacerbate our ability to put a high-quality teacher in every classroom. As far as vouchers and a marketplace for education, the evidence thus far suggests that this model does not work very well. But this deserves more examination over time because there may be aspects of the marketplace in education that are inevitable and thus require public schools to adapt.

A Postscript on this original posting: Milford won! See link and story below.

http://m.cincinnati.com/news.jsp?key=174460&rc=ne

Final tally: Milford school levy wins

By Cindy Kranz ckranz@enquirer.com

November 25, 2008 04:48 AM

BATAVIA - Milford School District levy supporters will spend Thanksgiving being thankful for provisional ballots.

With those ballots counted, Milford School District's levy passed by 46 votes, according to the Nov. 4 election results certified Tuesday by the Clermont County Board of Elections. The close margin triggers an automatic recount.

The 5.5-mill Milford levy lost earlier this month by 54 votes, but the Board of Elections still hadn't counted 3,373 provisional ballots. Those ballots are set aside and counted after Election Day for various reasons, such as voters who have moved to a new address.

Of the provisional ballots, 2,871 were counted, and 502 were not accepted. The final tally in the Milford ballot issue was 11,290 votes for the levy and 11,244 against the levy. An automatic recount is required if the difference between the "yes" and "no" votes is equal to or less than one-half of 1 percent (0.5%) of the total votes cast on the issue.

"We're absolutely thrilled," said Debbie Marques, Milford School Board president. "We were hopeful, because there were provisional ballots. This will mean we'll be able to get transportation back and get the textbooks we need for students. I can't tell you how happy I am. "I feel hopeful the community has seen that we have a board and administration that are being fiscally responsible and are good stewards of their money. We're not going to stop looking for ways to save and be cost conscious. We want to stretch this as long as possible." This was Milford's fifth attempt at passing an operating levy. In January 2007, as a result of a failed levy, the district eliminated busing for high school students and for students who live within two miles of their school. The school board promised that those cuts would be restored in January if this levy passed. Levy Chair Todd Munro, in a e-mail thanking supporters, said, "Even though there will be a recount, we don't believe that there will be a change in the final result." As supporters celebrate the outcome, he wrote, it's important to remember that there are more than 11,000 voters who did not support this levy. "Having not been on the positive side on levy outcomes before I think it is important to remember this is not a time to gloat. The outcome could have very easily gone the other way ... We must continue to reach out to those that vote "No" - for what ever reason." Common Sense, the organized levy opposition group, did not respond to a request for comment. A 5.5-mill levy would raise an additional $5.1 million annually. The owner of a $100,000 home would pay $168 more a year in property taxes. Also scheduled for a recount is the Goshen Township Precinct H vote on Pair A Dice local option Sunday sales. The issue failed Nov. 4, but with nine additional provisional votes counted, the results were tied at 163 each. Recounts of the Milford and the Goshen issues begin at 9 a.m. Monday. Dec. 1

November 26, 2008 9:01 AM
Anonymous comments are disabled. Please Join and/or login to post your comment.
Benson

About the Author

Andy Benson has served as an expert commentator and consultant on school funding cases in Ohio. He is currently director of policy for KnowledgeWorks Foundation, where he leads the education philanthropy's efforts to increase learning opportunities in the state and improve the education system. The foundation spearheads the School Funding Matters initiative and has provided support for improvements in high schools, increased adult workforce training opportunities, creation of P-16 collaboratives, and the encouragement of community engagement in the state.

A decade ago, he was founding president of the New Ohio Institute, a statewide public policy think tank that conducted in-depth studies on education, statewide polls and publications that served as a resource to advocates and policymakers across the state. He holds master's degrees from Harvard University and Ohio State University and a bachelor's degree from Ohio University.

Subscribe

This Week in
School Funding History

May 16, 2003

The Ohio Supreme Court prohibits any further litigation in the DeRolph case.

Links