I’ve been reading the documents promoting the Kettering schools 6.9 mill renewal levy, mailed to Kettering voters. You would think that an organization focused on public education would use the opportunity of a school levy to educate the public about how property tax actually works. But the documents promoting the Kettering levy are not focused on educating voters about this important public issue.  Instead, they are focused on selling voters on voting “Yes.”

Unfortunately, a Kettering resident, by studying about the renewal levy in Kettering’s “Blue Ribbon Report,” sent to all Kettering households, would be much less educated about property tax than if he or she had not studied the report at all. Realizing that you don’t understand something is much better than wrongly believing that you do.

Part of the Blue Ribbon Report is Q&A. Here is a one question from the report: “What is the average Kettering property owner paying for this operating issue that is up for renewal?”

And here is the correct answer: 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 this levy is now 6.162 mills ($6.162 per $1000 of taxable property), so, 57,726/1000 = 57.726 and 57.726 X 6.162 = $355.71. After the 12.5% rollback this becomes $311.24. So, the average Kettering property owner house is now paying: $311.24 each year for this renewal levy.

A report seeking to educate, not just sell, would have made similar explanation and, further, would have explained that the approval of this 6.9 mill levy authorizes the county auditor, if necessary, to raise the effective rate of this levy up to 6.9 mills, a 12% increase of the current effective rate of 6.162 mills.

A report that sought to educate would point out that just last year the effective tax rate for this levy increased from 6.13 mills to 6.162 mills, an increase of 3.2 cents per $1000 of taxable property. This renewal levy cost the property owner of the average property in Kettering, discussed above, $1.62 more in tax this year than what it cost last year. A report that sought to educate would explain why this increase occurred. The increase in rate occurred because this levy was approved to raise $8.2 million and if the tax base shrinks, then in order to raise this $8.2 million, the effective rate must go up. The maximum this rate can increase is 12% higher than the rate is now, because the effective rate limit is 6.9 mills. If the tax base erodes to the point where 6.9 mills fails to raise $8.2 million, then revenue to Kettering Schools from this levy will decrease to below $8.2 million.

The average Kettering home, now taxed $311.24 for this renewal, within five years, with zero increase in accessed value, could be taxed up to $348.59, a maximum increase of 12% of $311.24 or $37.35.

Kettering Schools should have explained all of this in their levy literature. They should have had an easily accessed explanation on the web. But, nothing. No explanation in the literature and no web-site explanation at all. I think Kettering voters would appreciate their school leaders treating them as adults, as fully empowered stake holders in Kettering Schools.

The “Blue Ribbon Report’s” answer to the question — “what would the average property owner pay?” — ignores the question of what “average property” in Kettering means. Instead, the report says, “The owner of a $100,000 home in Kettering is paying approximately $17 per month on this operating issue.”

Ouch. For a $100,000 property, this amount is wrong. Whoever edits “The Blue Ribbon Report” failed to catch the error. $17 per month is $204 per year. The correct amount is $189 per year, as correctly reported by the DDN in its editorial supporting the levy. I wonder if the school district has had any complaints that this misinformation?

Rather than educating voters in Kettering, “The Blue Ribbon Report” gives wrong information and leads voters to believe statements about their property tax obligation that is not true.  If people need the best property related advices, eXp Realty’s website should be checked out! The report says, “There will be absolutely no increases in taxes as a result of this Renewal Levy.” This is a true statement, only if the word “taxes” has the specific meaning “total revenue generated by this levy.” It is true that this 6.9 mill levy will never be allowed to collect a total revenue of more than $8.2 million. The community as a whole will pay no more taxes, only $8.2 million, but individual tax payers will be required to pay more in order to generate this $8.2 million.

A promise of “absolutely no increase in taxes,” to 99% of voters is a promise that their effective tax rate will not increase, and that if their property value stays constant, their tax obligation for this levy will not increase. This is wrong. The “Blue Ribbon Report” causes voters to believe something to be true that is simply not true.

The Levy Committee sent a number of letters to targeted groups of voters. (I write about it here.) I requested and received a copy of each of these letters. A letter, signed by each Kettering board member, says, “Because this is a RENEWAL LEVY, approval of ISSUE 12 will not raise your taxes one penny.” Underlined and in bold print. This is a true statement only if this statement is addressed to the City of Kettering as a whole and “your taxes” means that this $8.2 million total tax revenue will not increase. The individual property owner will see their taxes go up a bunch of pennies. (The average increase, over a five year period, is as much as $37.35.)

I’d really be embarrassed to have my name attached to such misleading advertisement.

A sign sent to voters with the message “Please post this note on your refrigerator as a reminder!”, gives this message, “Passage will not cost the community one cent more in additional taxes.” The word “cost” usually means, “the amount that one is required to pay.” Again, this statement is sowing misinformation.

A letter sent to Oakview Elementary School parents says, “Remember this issue won’t cost any of us one cent more in taxes.” Oops. Someone went too far. I can’t find a way to define these words, even in some very narrow absurd way, by which this Oakview statement could possibly be defended as truthful.

Another letter says, about the 6.9 renewal levy, “It won’t cost us a penny more in taxes.” This statement is true, only if its meaning is “it won’t cost the school system one penny lost in tax revenue of $8.2 million,” hardly what anyone reading such a phrase would understand it to mean.

Again, I’d be embarrassed as a teacher or principal to attempt to explain to an inquiring voter why such misleading advertisement was used.

The letters acknowledge that the economy is in a rough period. One letter says, “These are very challenging times for everyone.” Another letter says, “In these challenging economic times, supporting our schools is more important than ever.”

But nothing in these levy advertisement letters begins to explain the implication of these challenging economic times for property tax owners.   Not a word is said about the fact that Kettering’s tax base is shrinking and therefore to raise the same revenue, tax rates must go up. If the tax based shrinks to where it was in 2004, then the effective rate of this levy will return to where it started, 6.9 mills. This is a 12% increase.

If Kettering Schools had wanted to design a levy that would have guaranteed a “ZERO Increase In Taxes,” they would have needed to offered a replacement levy pegged to the current effective rate 6.162 mills.  Then, regardless of a shrinking tax base, the tax to the homeowner would have stayed constant, and, instead, as the tax base shrinks, revenue to Kettering Schools would shrink.

As an organization supposedly focused on education, Kettering Schools, in this levy missed a big opportunity to educate the public about this key issue of public importance, property tax. Schools that fail to be scrupulously honest with voters risk causing dangerous long term erosion of public support. In its zeal to make a short term gain — passing an important school levy — Kettering Schools chose a path that risks causing a long term problem.

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.