During the June 23 school board meeting, directors Carrie Cuff and Dan Call cast two votes in opposition to the school board’s plans to ask New Prague School District voters to approve in a single question an increase in the amount of property taxes it can use to fund daily operations. One of the votes was far more interesting than the other.
Director Call voted against asking voters to support the levy, indicating the district had not done enough to prepare for the building financial storm coming when the state and federal governments finally deal with their own dilemma of spending more money than they have on hand. Despite the counsel of the district’s legal counsel, he also opposed the plan noting the district has not given in to a vocal group calling for references to inclusion and diversity to be scrapped, particularly with regard to transgender students.
Unlike the previous operating levy referendum which Director Call voted to support and then hampered using incorrect information – it failed by just 37 votes – he was more out-front with his information this time around. Director Denny Havlicek, the school board’s chairperson, said the lack of unanimous support will make it harder to pass a levy increase. If the proposed increase fails at the polls this time, Call will be able to say he told ya’ so. He voted his conscious, but the other six members, if they choose to, might ask him to take some level of ownership of the ensuing budget reduction since the district’s expenses, mostly the cost of its staff’s wages and benefits, exceeds the aid the district receives from the state.
On the other hand, Cuff’s vote on the matter was interesting and insightful. She backed asking voters for the increase in the operating levy but opposed the single question which the other board members, including Call, supported. Director Cuff wanted to give voters two options without requiring one to pass for the other to pass. Later this summer, the school board must finalize the language in the ballot questions voters will consider.
Cuff proposed a separate question seeking passage of a bond referendum to help the district pay for facilities maintenance items – roofs no longer under warranty, mechanical systems in aging buildings, deteriorating parking lots dotted by potholes – and building security improvements. She was a member of a task force that studied facilities maintenance issues during the winter and early-spring. The board knows the maintenance issues will have to be addressed sooner or later.
The cost will likely only increase the longer the district waits.
The results of polling showed significantly more support separately for both a levy increase for operational costs and a bond referendum for needed maintenance work. The support drops to nearly 50-50 when the two issues are merged. After years of budget reductions, the June 23 vote, even as two separate, noncontingent questions, showed the majority of the school board was not about to risk putting both questions on a ballot. If the operating levy question fails again, jobs will be eliminated and the district is not looking forward to issuing more pink slips.
Keeping the two questions separate in a non-contingent fashion is a strategically astute move. Director Cuff is correct in her approach, but the timing of her request is too risky. Along with the usual anti-tax sentiment, there is too much working against passage of a levy increase the board can’t control, the city’s handling of a needed expansion of its police department, concerns about the economy, the looming changes to Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare (real or perceived).
The board can control the level of its fund balance – it seems the projected 14% fund balance is a little high for now – and the cost of looming contracts with the district’s unions. This is a good time for an early, pre-Election Day settlement with modest increases.
For now, the supporters of the requested operating levy referenda will spend the summer working against the backdrop of the to-be-determined outcome of the police station debate explaining why support for it is wise and worthwhile.