This post started out as a comment in response to Bruce Kettelle

Bruce, the thing is, I think we can both agree that school levy advertisement should not contain statements that are flat out untrue. And, in an ideal world, school levy ads should not contain statements that are misleading, either. But, the problem is, most any phrase that might be used to promote most school levies is likely to mislead. The phrase, “This Is A RENEWAL Levy,” to most people would probably communicate a promise of “zero increase in tax rate.” The phrase, “We are continuing with the same tax we approved in 2004,” would also probably be interpreted to mean, “zero increase in tax rate.” And the phase, “ZERO increase in taxes” communicates, “zero increase in tax rate.” But, regardless, approval of Kettering’s 6.9 mill renewal, in fact, will mean an increase in the effective tax rate

Because levy advertisements so easily misinform, a school levy sign should indicate a web-site link where an interested voter can easily go to research the levy. I’m surprised that some on-the-ball member of the Ohio Assembly doesn’t propose legislation requiring a web-address for levy campaigns. The levy web-site should have complete information and be designed to educate, not to sell. It should welcome contrary views and debate. The information should include the history of the levy, why it is needed, what it is used for, and what a “yes” vote means. There should also be information that would give a voter a good financial picture of the school district. The emphasis should be on open information, open dialogue.

I would feel different about the Kettering School levy ad that says “ZERO Increase In Taxes,” if the Kettering Schools had such a web-site, or at least, on their Kettering Schools web-site, had good information pertaining to the 6.9 mill renewal levy. Instead, at the Kettering Schools web-site, there is zero mention of the 6.9 mill renewal levy. Not a peep. No information about the levy at all. The absence of any mention of the levy at Kettering School’s web-site seems strange. At the Centerville Schools web-site, there is a great deal of information about the proposed Centerville School levy.

The Kettering levy committee did four different mailings of literature concerning the levy. Some of these mailings were sent just to selected groups of voters — those voters most likely to support the levy. I would like to know how those lists of school supporters were compiled. This use of targeted mailing is a common technique of sophisticated election campaigns. The purpose of such campaigns is not to vitalize democracy, it is to get out the winning vote. The idea is to get more “Yes” votes than “No” votes. But, it seems to me, the overall controlling motive must be not passing a levy, but building wide based and in-depth public support. And this bigger motive requires vitalizing democracy.  Using what could be seen as anti-democratic strategies will eventually reap public cynicism and eroded support of public schools. Someone needs to be looking out for the public good. And this someone should be the school system itself.

The emphasis needs to be on getting our democracy to work. Each taxpayer in Kettering School District is a shareholder in the public schools. I’m reminded that last year I wrote a review of David Matthews “Reclaiming Public Education by Reclaiming Our Democracy.” Matthews is President of the Charles Kettering Foundation. His central point in the book is that, in order to get our schools to work as they should, we will need to get our democracy to work. He writes, “We must have the public we need before we can have the schools we want.” To improve education,” the book argues, “there must be a more engaged, more informed, more active public: to improve education we must improve our democracy.

I had a friend challenge me to distribute this flyer throughout the Kettering precinct where I live. I said, “You know, I don’t want my neighbors to think I’m a kook — someone who wants to torpedo their local schools.”

But now I’m thinking, “Isn’t this really all about democracy?” I believe many Kettering voters would support a school renewal levy, even if they knew up front that there was a good chance, if their property value had zero growth in value, that over a five year period their property tax would nevertheless increase $36. Big whoop. This is not much of an increase. If I’m willing to continue to pay $300 for five more years, then needing to pay a little more would probably not change my mind.

But the problem is, people, when they vote “Yes” for this levy, will think they are voting for “ZERO Increase in Taxes,” not a probable small increase in taxes.

I would never consider going door to door trying to convince my neighbors to defeat a school levy. But I am considering going door to door in order to inspire my neighbors to think a little about their democracy.

If this levy fails on May 5, the district gets a do-over in November. The time between May and November could be a valuable time in Kettering to discuss the future of Kettering Schools.

So, I’m thinking about it. Thinking of rewriting that flyer and distributing it in my precinct. That would take a lot of effort. I would think of the purpose of such effort as conducting a sort of an experiment in grass root democracy. It would be interesting to compare the result of my precinct to the results in the other 63 precincts. I’m thinking about it.

This article summarizes the key points in my previous article.

Kettering’s school levy advertisements give erroneous information.  The ads wrongly promise  “ZERO Increase In Taxes.” The current “effective tax rate” for this 6.9 mills levy is 6.162 mills.  By approving the renewal of this 6.9 mill levy, voters are authorizing the auditor, over the next five years, to increase the current rate  (6.162 mills), if necessary, to its maximum effective rate (6.9 mills). This would be a 12% increase.

Total property valuation in Kettering is decreasing.   In the last three years, there has been a 4.9% decline in Kettering’s total property valuation. Nobody believes that this slide in total property valuation in Kettering will stop anytime soon.  The impact of the disappearance of GM from Kettering is still to be felt.  But this levy obligates Kettering property owners to every year raise a total of $8.2 million to support their public schools.  To raise this $8.2 million, when total valuation decreases, the tax rate must increase.

When the levy was first approved, in 2004, the 6.9 mill rate, each year, generated $8.2 million revenue for Kettering Schools.  Ohio Law says that a tax levy can never generate more money that what was originally approved.  Unless it is an “emergency levy,” however, it can generate less.  After 2004, the total valuation of property in Kettering kept increasing, and the 6.9 mill rate, if applied, would have generated revenue in excess of $8.2 million.  The county auditor, therefore, for several years, adjusted the “effective rate” downward.  In 2004, in order to generate $8.2 million, an effective rate of 6.9 mills was needed.  In 2009, because Kettering’s total property valuation is greater than it was in 2004, in order to generate $8.2 million, an effective rate of 6.162 mills is needed.  Kettering’s total property valuation is declining — toward a return to 2004’s total — and the effective tax rate is moving upwards toward the 6.9 mill rate it started at in 2004.

If the Kettering School Board had wanted to offer voters a levy that guaranteed to not increase the tax rate, the board should have offered a levy with a ceiling, a maximum millage rate, pegged to the current effective rate — 6.162 mills — not a maximum that is 12% higher.  This 6.162 mill rate generates this year $8.2 million.  But, because every year total property valuation in Kettering is decreasing, a 6.162 mill levy would mean that every year, after this year, Kettering Schools would lose revenue.  The option chosen by the board means that even as total valuation in the district goes down, the $8.2 million revenue to Kettering Schools will be maintained and property taxes will go up (a maximum of 12%).

By agreeing to approve this 6.9 mill renewal levy, voters are agreeing that, if necessary, in order to continue to generate $8.2 million each year for Kettering Schools, their tax rate can increase, over a five year period, by as much as 12% — from the current effective rate (6.162 mills) to the maximum effective rate (6.9 mills) approved by this levy.

Advertisement signs around Kettering, that urge support of the 6.9 mill renewal levy and promise “ZERO Increase In Taxes,” amount to false advertisement.  Voters who want to support their public schools have a right to be know, when they vote “yes,” what they are voting for.