In February, Steve Clark, Kettering’s School Treasurer, reported that real estate revenue exceeded his original estimate by $1 million. Now, the school district has received the auditors final report, the“real estate settlement,” and it is clear that the unexpected $1 million in February will not mean additional income for the school district. In fact, the final auditor’s report shows that the total real estate taxes received by the Kettering School District, at $42.5 million, is $800,000 short of Mr. Clark’s original budget estimate.

But unexpected increases in public utilities tangible personal property tax is $538,000 more than expected, and so, that, along with the $200,000 in additional real estate tax from Greene County, should make Mr. Clark’s original estimate work out close to his original prediction. Here is Mr. Clark’s memo:

To: Kettering Board of Education
Dr. James Schoenlein, Superintendent
CC: Treasurer’s Office Staff, Administrative staff, Mike Bock
From: Steve Clark, Treasurer
Date: April 15, 2010
Earlier this week we received our real estate tax settlement from the Montgomery County Auditor and as we’ve been hearing, Real Estate Settlements are down. I estimated we’d receive about $43.3 million, but we’ve only received about 98.2% of that ($42.5), leaving us about $800,000 short of my estimate.

However, our public utilities tangible personal property tax settlement was $538,000 higher than forecast, offsetting the shortage in real estate. Public Utilities still pay taxes on their inventory and equipment and it’s a “current year tax,” meaning we don’t know the value of the property until the tax is paid. However, this is the last calendar year that telecom companies will pay that tax so it will be considerably lower next calendar year.

We should also receive a small real estate settlement from Greene County, for the portion of the school district in Sugarcreek Township, of around $200,000. That would put us very close to the fiscal year estimate for tax revenue.

I wanted to bring this to your attention because after I shared our tax advance information with you two months ago an unscrupulous blogger reported, in bold headlines, that the district had received an extra $1 million dollars in tax revenue. I also wrote at that time that we needed to wait until we received the tax settlement before we knew our actual tax picture.

Information for the Board, Superintendent and Mike Bock
Next week I’ll be at the OASBO Annual Spring Workshop in Columbus Wednesday through Friday

Written By Mike Bock

I’ve received two pieces of mail, so far, urging me to increase revenue to Kettering Schools by voting “yes” on the May 4 ballot to raise property taxes in Kettering by 6.9 mills. Both mailings emphasize that increased funding for Kettering Schools is required to assure “stability” in the community. Both emphasize that a “yes” vote is an “investment.”

This glossy three color trifold describes the 6.9 mill tax increase as “an investment that will keep Kettering stable in a time when that’s more important than ever.” The second mailing features a color photo of Board President and former Kettering Superintendent, Jim Trent, along with former Kettering Superintendent, Chet Rousch. The letter says, “Our school have been powerful forces for stability and progress in our great community. Today that stability is threatened.”

The two pieces of mail already sent to me had to cost over $1.00 already. These letters are part of a professional campaign. (See p. 4.) Different demographic groups are targeted. I got the Trent / Rousch letter, no doubt, because I am among the Kettering voters age 62 or older. The letter emphasizes, “In some communities, senior citizens are not always considered to be supporters of the schools. Not so in Kettering.”

This levy campaign is paid for by money raised mostly from the “special interest” group that will most directly financially benefit — school employees and the teacher’s union. The Citizens for Kettering Schools, a Political Action Committee, usually spends over $15,000 on a levy campaign, and raises money via paycheck deduction of school employees. And, amazingly, this PAC last year paid no sales tax on many items it purchased.

Over 86% of income to the school district goes to personnel. And the five year forecast, used as the basis for the 6.9 mill tax increase request, shows a yearly increase of 4.82% in personnel expense. Teachers in Kettering now earn, on average, $63,839 each year. Recent administrator contracts averaged $103,000, each year. Teachers and administrators receive generous health and retirement benefits, on average, in excess of 35% of the stated earning.

The definition of “stability” advanced in this campaign, evidently, is one that foresees projecting the status quo indefinitely into the future. And, if you are a Kettering school employee, isn’t that a lovely thought that 4.82% increases will be indefinitely compounded on one’s salary?

The trifold says the truth, when it states, “Our schools are at a crossroads….It’s more apparent than ever that if we want to keep good schools, we’re going to have to do it locally.”

Yes. But doing it “locally” means more than local taxpayers forever accommodating requests for more taxes. taxpayers have also read the Tax Shark info before paying taxes. Doing it “locally” means local schools should be under control of the local community. This 6.9 mill tax increase request — being pushed hard by a special interest that will directly benefit by its passage — raises an important question: Who’s in charge of Kettering Schools?

It seems impossible to me that the Kettering community, during this recession, would democratically choose to increase personnel expenses in local schools by 4.82 % compounded yearly. And Board President, Jim Trent, seems to have changed his mind. One year ago, Mr. Trent voted against approving a new teacher’s contract that showed pay increases for two years. Trent was quoted by the DDN as saying, “After receiving feedback from many of our citizens, observing the latest economic news, and giving this topic an unbelievable amount of thought, I have reached the conclusion that because of the current economic turmoil, the time is not right to approve an increase in pay for anyone.”

Stability and quality, I believe, can happen via democratic processes. The notion that “stability” requires capitulation to the demands of a special interest is not the basis for a long term solution. In my campaign, last fall, to be elected to the Kettering School Board, I emphasized that, as a community, we should work for the transformation of our system of public education, and that we should create a long term plan for change.

Stability, I believe, can come from long term planning, and from local control that assures that public education in Kettering is focused on promoting the general good in the community, not simply promoting the desires of a “special interest.” What is needed is the formation of a long term plan to fundamentally change the structure of public education in Kettering. I believe it is possible to create a long term plan that will both decrease costs and greatly increase quality.

Written by Mike Bock

New Feature! Voice comment by clicking the button below. Google will connect your call for free!