History of tax levy increases

School board race TAX LEVY ISSUE The business of education Total district operating revenues District spending and enrollment History of tax levy increases About the new tax levy Paying those employees Measuring student achievement How Columbia compares	History of tax levy increases In the past 10 years, Columbia voters have approved both property tax levy increases put before them. The first one was for 58 cents in 1999. The second one was for 19 cents in 2003. Like the request facing voters now — for 54 cents per $100 of assessed property, like a car or a house — the first one occurred in the midst of the district spending more than it collected in revenue. Different this year is the size of the district’s deficit spending. For the 1998-99 school year, the district spent $2.5 million more than it had in revenue. This year, the district exceeded its budget by $10.3 million, about 6.7 percent of the district’s income. That money was used to hire about 70 additional employees and raise teacher base pay by $1,000. The district also overspent in 2004-05 by $1.5 million. Each time, the district dipped into its substantial reserves — something it can’t do continually. Whether the property tax levy increase is approved on April 8, the district has pledged to cut $5 million from its annual costs. On March 20, the Columbia School Board considered ways to make these cuts, including reducing employee overtime pay, eliminating insurance for part-time workers, stopping earthquake insurance and dropping almost 30 full-time employees, in part through attrition. (Full lists can be found on the district's Web site, www.columbia.k12.mo.us.) The board is scheduled to vote on the cuts on April 3. The district seeks to make a strong distinction between the $10.3 million it spent on employees and the $5 million it is cutting. “The budget cuts are not because of the new positions,” district spokeswoman Michelle Baumstark said in an e-mail. “The first priority list of a little more than $5 million in reductions is necessary in order to lower the tax levy amount from 79 cents to 54 cents. While there has been much talk about why the district needs the additional tax levy revenue, it is not solely because of new hires made last year.” Baumstark’s e-mail continued: “The district needs the tax levy because of the following: State funding has changed, district enrollment has increased by more than 700 students over the last five years, increased costs for employing teachers and staff over the last five years, increased costs in mandatory retirement benefits the district must pay over the last five years, increases in fixed costs such as transportation and utilities over the last five years.” AUDREY SPALDING \| news@columbiamissourian.com

School board race

TAX LEVY ISSUE

The business of education

In the past 10 years, Columbia voters have approved both property tax levy increases put before them. The first one was for 58 cents in 1999. The second one was for 19 cents in 2003.

Like the request facing voters now — for 54 cents per $100 of assessed property, like a car or a house — the first one occurred in the midst of the district spending more than it collected in revenue.

Different this year is the size of the district’s deficit spending. For the 1998-99 school year, the district spent $2.5 million more than it had in revenue.

This year, the district exceeded its budget by $10.3 million, about 6.7 percent of the district’s income. That money was used to hire about 70 additional employees and raise teacher base pay by $1,000.

The district also overspent in 2004-05 by $1.5 million. Each time, the district dipped into its substantial reserves — something it can’t do continually.

Whether the property tax levy increase is approved on April 8, the district has pledged to cut $5 million from its annual costs. On March 20, the Columbia School Board considered ways to make these cuts, including reducing employee overtime pay, eliminating insurance for part-time workers, stopping earthquake insurance and dropping almost 30 full-time employees, in part through attrition. (Full lists can be found on the district's Web site, www.columbia.k12.mo.us.) The board is scheduled to vote on the cuts on April 3.

The district seeks to make a strong distinction between the $10.3 million it spent on employees and the $5 million it is cutting.

“The budget cuts are not because of the new positions,” district spokeswoman Michelle Baumstark said in an e-mail. “The first priority list of a little more than $5 million in reductions is necessary in order to lower the tax levy amount from 79 cents to 54 cents. While there has been much talk about why the district needs the additional tax levy revenue, it is not solely because of new hires made last year.”

Baumstark’s e-mail continued:

“The district needs the tax levy because of the following: State funding has changed, district enrollment has increased by more than 700 students over the last five years, increased costs for employing teachers and staff over the last five years, increased costs in mandatory retirement benefits the district must pay over the last five years, increases in fixed costs such as transportation and utilities over the last five years.”

AUDREY SPALDING | news@columbiamissourian.com