April 26, 1998
Area educators endorse Issue I
By Cathy Willoughby
Staff Writer
Although the May 5 primary ballot is full of issues, two state education issues are of crucial importance in the future of education funding.
State Issues I and II are part of the Ohio Legislature's answer to the verdict given to them by the Ohio Supreme Court following the Derolph vs. The State of Ohio. It found that the state's method of education funding needed to be both more adequate and equal among the districts in the state. And that the funds used for school districts should rely less on property taxes.
According to Cliff Treyens, spokesperson for the Every Child Counts Committee, which supports both issues, Issue I authorizes the state to borrow money to assist school districts in repairing or buiding new facilities.
''It allows the state to issue general obligation bonds that are backed with the full faith and credit of the state. It helps to secure the investment at a more advantageous rate.'' he said. It will allow the state to distribute approximately $100 to $120 million dollars to some of the districts in the state that need the most extra help.
''It gives the state an additional tool to supplement state funds that are already available to the schools. It is targeted towards the most critical needs, districts where they simply couldn't pass their levies or they have very poor tax bases.'' he added. He also explained that the School Facilities Commission will be the funds coordinating body and will work with the existing formulas to define what areas are funded.
Issue II is the controversial 1 percent sales tax for educational funding. The issue's proposal is that the additional money raised would be split between additional money to the schools and property tax relief for homeowners.
''This is the major issue that we are all concerned with, and there are all different organizations for and against the issue. There are two major teacher unions split on the issue. The opinions of the educational organizations doesn't send a clear message to the voters, and you will find newspapers who are giving endorsements both ways,'' said State Representative Rex Damschroder (R-89th District). ''I sat through a whole year of hearings and I honestly think the state will swim either way. And Seneca County will still have good schools.'' he added. Damschroder said that the area's good schools are due more from involvement of the parents and dedicated personnel, and that an additional influx of state money would not make or break the school systems.
''And for the average homeowner, this issue will really not cost them. The property tax relief will be higher than the cost of the sales tax to the consumer.'' He used as an example, an average household with an annual income of $36,000. ''Perhaps $15 to $20,000 of that will be taxable with the sales tax, that additional penny will amount to about $150 to $200 a year, and that's a worse case scenario. The property tax relief will amount to an additional 15 percent, up to an additional $275 maximum. So the tax relief could be greater than the amount paid out in sales tax.'' he said.
'' I urge voters to think globally and act locally.'' Denise Callihan, Tiffin City Schools superintendent said. ''We have a .98 mill bond issue on the ballot also, and I urge people to remember that local tax dollars raised stay locally.'' Board president Christopher English echoed her statements. ''I know that the voters have some doubts on the state issues. Yet I urge them to support their local issues at the ballot. Many people are concerned that the sales tax may be another Lottery II issue. They did not tell us how the moneywill be allocated to the district and they won't until the votes are counted.''
''My board has come out publicly as opposing both issues. WE don't feel that they meet the requirements of the Ohio Supreme court in the DeRolph decision. As we view it, it will not financially solve any problems for most districts across the state.'' Ron Jump, sperintendent of Hopewell-Loudon schools said. ''I feel that the consequences of the presentation of future levies and issues on the ballot would be tougher to pass as a result of this passage.''
Old Fort's interim superintendent Walter Baney stated that the district would be losing their current equity funding from the state following the new funding formula. ''So that the new formula won't help us, and will probably end up hurting us in the long run.'' he said. Baney added that it would be interesting to estimate what the county would pay out in the one percent sales tax, versus the money coming back to the schools in this area.
''Would the county be sending out more than they would be getting back? That would be an interesting statistic to see.''