Last May, Citizens for Kettering Schools advertised the 6.9 mill tax renewal as “ZERO Increase In Taxes,” and spent about $13,200 on a successful campaign. Letters sent home to parents of Kettering students said, if the levy passed, there would not be “not a penny more in tax.” I objected to the Ohio Election Commission that when The Kettering Superintendent of Schools promised, “absolutely no increase in taxes,” he was engaging in false advertisement.
As it turns out, since last year, not only the effective tax rate for the 6.9 mill renewal school levy increased, but, the effective rate for other previous Kettering school levies and bonds also increased. In total, the effective rate in Kettering for school property tax increased, from last year to this year, by 2.34%.
To pay for Kettering school tax, the average property in Kettering ($164,932) is taxed $48.60 more this year ($2,126.74) than last year ($2078.14). This amounts to $29.47 more per $100,000 valuation. (Regardless of last year’s promise of “not a penny more,” of this additional $29.47 tax per $100,000 valuation, 53 cents comes from the renewed 6.9 mill levy approved last May.)
Effective rates for school taxes are variable, because, according to Ohio law, property tax levies cannot raise more tax money than the amount originally approved. The 6.9 mill levy, renewed last year, for example, originally was approved in 2004, and, at that time, 6.9 mills was needed to raise $8.2 million. After 2004, total property valuation increased in Kettering, and, in order to collect the $8.2 million, but no more, allocated for this levy, the effective rate for this 6.9 mills decreased. In 2007, the effective rate was 6.1317 mills — meaning, only 6.1317 mills were needed to raise the $8.2 million. But since 2007, the effective rate has been rising. To bring in the same revenue, $8.2 million, the effective tax rate for this 6.9 mill levy, this year, is 6.1768 mills.
In total, adding all of the effective rates of of bonds and levies from 13 accounts, last year, to support Kettering Schools, Kettering properties were taxed at an effective rate of 41.142869 mills. This year, to support Kettering Schools, Kettering properties are taxed at an effective rate of 42.105200 mills. The effective rate for property tax to support Kettering schools increased 2.34% — in a year when there was, supposedly, “ZERO” new taxes. Here are some of the increases:
- Last year the 6.9 mill levy, originally passed in 2004, had an effective tax rate of 6.1616 mills. This year, the effective rate is 6.1767.
- Last year the 3.2 mill levy, originally passed in 2000, had an effective rate of 2.6246. this year the effective rate is 2.6311
- Last year the 6.7 mill levy, originally passed in 1990, had an effective rate of 3.2890. This year the effective rate is 3.2970
- Last year, the 1993 bond for $14.8 million cost .5 mills This year it costs 1.0 mills
- Last year the 2002 bond for $102 million cost 4.5 mills. This year is costs 4.9 mills.
Here is a PDF showing the effective rates for the last five years.
In my post last year, A Decrease In The Value Of Kettering’s Total Tax Base Means The Renewal Levy Will Increase Taxes, I wrote, “I am not objecting to paying a few more dollars in taxes to support my local schools. I do object to our school board using antidemocratic practices as a strategy for funding the school system.”
I wrote, here, “The problem is, these ads trifled with the public’s trust. Losing public trust has long term consequences. In the long run, the only factor that can possibly make a strong system of public education is if the system is supported by a strong community. … This means transparency — it means inviting the public into meaningful participation.”
Now, the Kettering School Board is asking voters to approve a new levy for 6.9 mills, and in this important request, the Board should be held to a high standard of transparency to explain their reasons for this request. More on this new levy in a future post.
Here is how I calculated the amount of average Kettering school property tax increase — $48.60
- The current average listing price for houses in Kettering is $164,932. This seems a fair definition of “average Kettering property.” If the county auditor values a property at $164,932, then the tax requirement for this property for this renewal levy would be determined as follows: 35% of $164,932 = 57,726 (the taxable amount); the current effective rate for Kettering Schools is now 42.105200 mills ($42.105200 per $1000 of taxable property), so, 57,726/1000 = 57.726 and 57.726 X 42.105200 = $2430.56. After the 12.5% rollback this becomes $2,126.74
- Similarly, 41.142869 mills (the amount last year) on a property worth $164,932 has a tax of $2078.14.
- The difference is $48.60
I am not objecting to paying a few more dollars in taxes to support my local schools. I do object to our school board using antidemocratic practices …
You went to the Ohio Elections Commission before the facts were in. “Absolutely no increase” turns out to be not quite true:
(* 57.726 (- 6.1767 6.1616))
0.8716626000000194
Looks like “absolutely no increase” turns out to be an 87 cent increase–which no levy supporter anticipated. No levy supporter made a “alse statement, either knowing the same to be false or acting with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
Meanwhile, our Governor and State Superintendent took their last years’ efforts to Washington D.C. and left embarrassed themselves and empty-handed.
Now Kettering voters are asked to invest in their share of a statewide system that just earned a $400M thumbs down from the feds.
Eric, thanks for the Education Week link. I’d like to know more about what happened in the Race to the Top competition. I think I’ll highlight that article in another post.
By approving the 6.9 mill renewal levy, last May, Kettering voters gave authority to the county auditor to change the effective tax rate for this levy, if needed to raise the $8.2 million originally set for this levy, from the effective rate that was then current, 6.1616 mills, to the maximum rate of 6.9 mills. A change in effective rates from 6.1616 mills to 6.9 mills would be a 12% increase.
We were promised, “not a penny more,” and in the first year, it turns out, the average Kettering property needed to pay 88 pennies more. The issue is not the dollars involved. I think Kettering voters, who understood all of the facts, would still have supported the 6.9 mill renewal. Voters should know what they are voting for, and levy campaign workers should know, as well. A great school district cannot be built via trifling with the public trust.
The change in “effective tax rate” does not amount to a tax increase or a tax decrease. It generates the same amount of tax money for the schools. Do the school tout a tax decrease when the “effective tax rate” goes down? No. You would scream about that if they did, and rightfully so. So claiming a change in the “effective rate” is an increase is also bogus. I believe your charges were thrown out, were they not. I guess you just don’t get it.
Kenny, I’d say that most people would agree with me that if they pay more tax on the same property this year than last year then this can be described as an increase in taxes. There’s only two possible reasons why the amount of a property tax increases: 1) an increase in valuation or 2) an increase in the effective rate — or both. Fluctuation in the effective rate impacts the individual property owner, and the fact that the effective rate increased by 2.34% is significant. In the past, these effective rates, every year, decreased and these decreases were explained in levy campaigns that complained that Ohio law does not allow districts to take advantage of inflation. If there was some way of doing the research, I would expect to find that in previous years, when effective rates were declining, levy renewal campaigns that promised “ZERO Increase In Taxes” used that fact, of declining effective rates, as part of their message.
As I say above, the issue is not the dollars involved. I think Kettering voters, who understood all of the facts, would still have supported the 6.9 mill renewal. The issue is the fact that a great school district needs transparency. Voters should know what they are voting for. My complaint to the Ohio Election Commission did not go forward, that doesn’t mean it was without merit.
Mike,
Actually, “some” people will pay more taxes on the 6.9 mill levy, “some” will pay the same, “some” will pay less. It all depends on the County re-apprasial and how your property fared compared to the community as a whole. To say “most will pay more” is inaccurate. Once again, it will only raise the exact same amount of tax dollars.
If your complaint had merit, why did it not go forward.
Kenny, this post reports that the effective rate for Kettering school property taxes, from last year to this year, increased by 2.34% and you seem in agreement about this fact.
If you learned that the effective rate of Ohio sales tax increased, say, .5%, if the fact that the reason for this increase was to assure that Ohio have a constant revenue amount, that fact would not change the reality that everyone would agree to, that such an increase in the effective sales tax rate should be described an an increase in tax. It would not matter if, subsequently, you bought an item for $1 or $10,000. Of course, the dollar amount of tax fluctuates according to the value of the item purchased, but, it is the effective rate that describes the level of taxation, not the specific dollar amount of tax that is charged in individual transactions. It seems fair that the same reasoning that applies to evaluating an increase in the effective sales tax rate should also apply to evaluating to an increase in the effective rate of property tax. In both cases, an increase in the effective rate is commonly understood as an increase in taxes, meaning, an increase in the level of taxation.
I write about the complaint to the OEC, and why, in my judgment it was dismissed, here.
Kenny-
Mike failed to demonstrate probable cause because:
1. At the time, a tax increase had not resulted from levy passage
2. He referenced a district publication that was not campaign material intended to promote the levy.
My taxes went up $600 on a $85,000 property, I wish it was only $30