001Good evening and thank you for attending the July 21st, 2025 special meeting of the Westerville City Schools Board of Education. This evening's agenda will be displayed on the screens in the front of the room. Printed agendas are available for a guest in the back of the room or you may find the agenda on your mobile device by connecting to the district's website at www.wcsoh.org. Click on our district link. Select board of education and then follow the board docs link to our current meeting agenda. And with that, Miss Marshall, will you please call the role? >> Mrs. Altman >> here. >> Mr. Hackleman >> here. >> Mrs. Valentine >> here. >> Mrs. Levian is absent. Mrs. Meyer >> here. Would you please join us in the pledge of allegiance? All right. Next up, we have public
002comments. And may I have a motion to allow public comments tonight? >> So moved. >> Second. >> And would you please take the vote? >> Mrs. Valentine? >> Yes. >> Mr. Huckleman? >> Yes. >> Mrs. Hotman. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Meyer. >> Yes. And um the board of education welcomes public comment on educational issues of interest to our school community. The board does not discriminate based on the identity or viewpoint of the speaker during our public participation. However, the board president may limit comments that are obscene, abusive, or harassing. In an attempt to protect the privacy interests of our students, the board asked that speakers not identify students by name during their comments. Persons having public complaints about district personnel, programming, or operations will be referred to the process set forth in board policy 9130.
003Finally, the board reminds speakers that their statements should be directed to the board as a whole and not to individual board members. Each speaker will have three minutes to address the board. A timer will be shown on the screens and Mr. Ree will call time when five minute three three minutes have elapsed. Our first speaker this evening is Mr. Doug Krinsky. Welcome. Thank you. Appreciate you allowing public comments. Mine's in reference to the income tax proposal that you're going to be voting on here shortly. Uh if you do go ahead and approve that. Um, you already know this, but I I'll be fighting tooth and nail harder than the last levy on this levy. Um, and there's several reasons why. Number one, uh, the $50 million you transferred out should have been brought back. Um,
004so the $50 million for those special computer things you're going to be doing. Um, those should be for true operating expenses. So, that would help with some of your deficit spending, which I'll get to in a second. Uh, it's my number two point, uh, stop the deficit spending. You stop the deficit spending, you don't need any more money. So, if you address that issue, which I think is the number one issue, not more money, but deficit spending and spending money where you don't need to be spending money, uh, that would take care of the problem. If you do put this levy up, what it's going to do is put an enormous burden on workingclass families. But again, you probably already know that. Um, it's also going to put a burden on all renters, which in
005the past uh, didn't pay property taxes and they never paid a dime other than increased rent. So, what's going to do is every renter of a house or an apartment is now going to be fully engaged and we will fully engage them. Um, by my estimation, the average house in Westerville is worth $354,000. The last levy, it would have been a $68 increase for them. The average household income in Westerville is $107,000, which is now going to put a burden of an $82 on them, which is a 32% increase on the average household. If you look at property taxes, you look at property values, and you look at household income. So, what you're actually asking for is a huge burden on those workingclass families, a higher burden on those working-class families. Um, in addition to
006the renters, whether it's a house or an apartment. Um, so again, not quite sure what's going on there. So, also on the last levy, we're asking for 20 million more a year. Now, um, after all the cuts that supposedly were put in place, although for some reason the budget keeps going up, but the 20 million you had asked for, now all of a sudden it's 24 million you're going to be getting if your numbers are right and the income comes in where you estimate it. Um, so actually after all the cuts and you looking for 20 million, it should be asking for less, but yet you're asking for more. So again, I'm not quite sure I understand the logic. And my last point I'm going to bring up is if you think the senior citizens
007are going to just cart blanch vote for this because this isn't going to directly impact them. Keep in mind a lot of those senior citizens still work a little bit. They're going to pay a little bit and they don't like tax tax increases. Whether it directly impacts them or not. Many of my friends are retired senior citizens. They don't work. This would not impact them. And I guarantee you they're going to the bo the polls to vote no on this. And they won't be alone. We will be going after that vote. Um, we will get that vote and this elevy will go down like the last one. My opinion, it's a bad move. I wouldn't vote for it, but I know you will. Thanks for your time. And next up, we have Miss Peg Duffy.
008Welcome. First, I commend the board for allowing public comments at a special session. This is unusual. We appreciate it. I attended school board regularly for over 30 years. You haven't seen me very much. I quit at a particular birthday, but I felt it was worth coming back on this. There are times I voted against levies. I have never felt as sorry for the school board as I do now. The people who are making our decisions, they've been told that they're going to get money. Oh, that is going to be clawed back. We don't I didn't know until I checked with Miss Marshall tonight that the possibility of overriding the governor's vetos goes through the entire bianium. I thought it ended at the end of the year. That means they've got to live with this. How
009could how can you plan for what is going on? Um Doug and Doug Kinsky and I have known one another for a long time. Uh I think the figures that Doug is using are based on the income in the city of Westerville, not the entire school district. My understanding is that the state uses slightly different figures, so it wouldn't be that much. I don't see anything wrong with um renters being awakened to the fact that they they pay for the schools because a lot of renters don't do that don't realize that when the rent goes up that's because the property owner has increased property taxes. As for senior citizens, I think that the thing that has to be emphasized this is based on W2 wages. Now, this is going to be awakening for some of
010our young people. It's not going to affect me on pension, social security because I don't work. But I think we need to pass this. This is probably as low as they can go and still keep us running with a modicum of what we expect. There are too many people who think, well, let the state pay for it. Hey guys, we're the state, so we're going to pay for it one way or another. All right. Um, next we'll move on to the resolution to 4.01 to proceed with the proposition of income tax 75%. And may I have a motion to approve this resolution? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Miss Marshall, will you talk to us about this resolution, please? >> Uh, yes. Thank you, President Meyer, members of the board. So, I actually put together
011a short PowerPoint um just so that we have some visuals for what's actually >> Thank you. >> going to be on the ballot uh should the board approve this resolution. I just want to remind everybody where we've been and where we are today. So, we went through the state budget process. Um, had various versions of the school funding formula and what that looks like for school districts. The governor did sign the final version of the budget that was approved by the conference committee on June 30th. Uh, along with 67 vetos. Um, so we're very grateful to the governor for a lot of the vetos that he did pass. And I just want to thank our community for their advocacy around school funding. um how the state's budget process was going to impact our local school
012community. Um I think you know this isn't and the conversation is not over. The house actually met today to override a provision one of the vetos that the governor had. There's two other provisions that are still pending there. Um but it'll be a continuing conversation. They do have the entire bienium budget period to override veto should they decide to do that. Uh but again, thank you to our community for their advocacy under the school funding space and with the budget process. Um it it definitely made an impact and made a difference um for the good. So where we landed with the state funding formula out of the budget, um it's continuing to be phased in. So it'll be 83% in the current year, fiscal year 26, and then 100% in fiscal year 27. Still using
013those fiscical year 22 cost inputs. So, still being funded based on the cost of education in 2022 versus today's costs and that will be for 26 and 27. Um, updates the local wealth calculation with the most current data. So, we still have an out-of- balance formula where it looks like um our community is wealthier, but we're not adding more dollars to the state funding formula with the costs. And um it does add a slight uh base cost supplement of $27 per student. It adds an enrollment growth supplement for eligible districts and adds a performance-based supplement for eligible districts. So, still getting the final details on what districts would be eligible for that. That'll be that will depend on what our data looks like for this year and next year um for whether or not we
014will be eligible for that. And then reduced career awareness exploration dollars. It reworks how students are identified as economically disadvantaged for the disadvantaged people impact aid. That's been in the formula for a very long time. Um there is a direct certification process that uh you know if families receive uh services directly from the county uh we are able to have them directly certified as economically disadvantaged from county services and that also applies to Medicaid um if they receive Medicaid. uh this um now changes that calculation where 75% will be based on the applications plus the direct certification but going forward they're trying to phase in where all of the economically disadvantaged students are based on the direct certification. I think it's important to understand that um we have about 1,700 students who qualify for uh
015free and reduced lunch, which is what we're talking about, um through the application process, not through direct certification. So, if I'm thinking forward, does that mean we're going to be not counting those students in that economically disadvantaged number in the future? So, um more to come with that, but I think that's the ultimate goal with this. Also, um it adds a lot of uh lot more um administrative work onto our food services team to verify applications. Uh previously, I think we only had to verify 10% and now we're verifying 100% of those applications um as part of this process. So again, it's adding a huge administrative burden, which means an increase in our administrative costs um that wasn't included in the funding formula for additional dollars. Just want to make sure that's clear to everybody.
016Um it also updates the minimum state share calculations for transportation. So still waiting on um actual details, numbers, calculations behind this. I I do anticipate that we will see some of the components updated um in July from the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce with our funding formula, but the majority of these will not be completely updated until our our October payments. Um so there will be a transition period for us to see exactly where we stand. Were you going to say something? >> Okay. >> Yeah. Uh so that's the state funding formula. um where we landed with what was approved. Uh one of the provisions that was in the budget bill uh was the clawback or the cash cap or clawback uh provision. Uh so the house had introduced this concept again uh hadn't
017been part of any previous conversations but the house had introduced this concept uh where school districts and only school districts could only carry over no more than 30% in a fund balance of their previous year's expenses. uh the Senate version up that to 50%. The conference committee came together and settled at 40%. So that's what was before the governor um for consideration as he was signing the bill. The governor did veto this provision. Um uh as part of his 67 vetos. So I'm not hearing that this is something that's going to come back up as part of the veto override. Uh but there are several pieces of legislation that are in various committees. um at the state house where a portion of this is being considered. So, it's important that we continue to keep an
018eye on what that might look like. >> I think it's important to mention to and we talked about this at previous meetings that um it is the recommendation of the legislators that we look at the accounting changes that we made. So, you know, we talked about the the money that we moved. Um and just to clarify, those are operational expenses that were already planned in our five-year planning documents. So, when we talk about technology, those are updating computers as they age out. Um, taking care of the uh projectors and other devices in our classrooms as they age out. Those are already planned expenditures that are part of our operations. We're just recoding how that is listed in our budget um per the recommendation of our legislators. So, I just want to point out those aren't
019new projects or things that we >> are doing. And I think it's important to understand too, the expenses were moved along with the fund balance. So, it also decreased our expenses overall in our uh general operating fund as we move the fund balance out and now we'll be paying for those things out of that fund. It's just an accounting piece that um our legislators and you know I I can't necessarily disagree with them believes will create a more transparent situation for our community to understand how those dollars are planned to be spent. So, um that's what we're looking at moving forward. So regardless of the clawback or cap provision, I wouldn't recommend changing that accounting practice at any point if everyone feels that that's a more transparent practice. Uh so uh where we landed based
020on the legislative services commission um their calculations, they did simulations for the districts that came out of the conference committee and what was ultimately approved in the school funding formula. uh we would lose about 2.3 million over the next two years um from the state funding formula. Uh other funding challenges we have uh Angie shared a slide at the last meeting on this during her superintendent's comments. Um our federal funds, we have several of our federal grants that were put on hold. Um we found out on June 30th that we were supposed to receive those allocations on July 1st. Uh they have already been appropriated by Congress. Um, and we're not quite sure why they're being held at this point. We had been told, uh, I guess throughout this process, you know, there's a lot
021of conversation about abolishing the US Department of Education and returning money back to the states and what that all looks like. Uh, we had been, uh, told repeatedly throughout these conversations that that would not impact schools until fiscal year 27 because funds had already been appropriated for fiscal years 26. So, it looks like we may be looking at not receiving about that um 919,000 that we have. So, for professional development um some of our English learner family supports and things like that um that those dollars cover. So, we will keep an eye on um you know this moving forward and see where we land with that. Nicole, before you move on really quickly, I know you've talked about this in the past. How underfunded have we been since I think you have said since 2021
022and this on now adds on top of that? So, if we take just what the um state's own calculation has provided for of what the district should receive um which I can't even completely agree that that was an appropriate calculation, right? It was probably more much more than that. Um we've been underfunded by about 45 million since 2021. um that doesn't count the actual funding decreases that we've seen um over that t same time period and the shift in the funding formula and how they netted our funding because of what was going to private and charter schools. It's a very complicated matter, but if we just look at what the state calculated funding we should be receiving and what we were actually receiving, it's about $45 million since that time. >> Thank you. Uh so
023what you have before you tonight is a resolution to proceed with an earned income tax. I just want to make sure it's clear what this does and doesn't apply to. So earned income tax applies to residents of the school district. So our 52 square miles, anyone that lives resides within that 52 square miles boundaries of the school district who earn wages and net self-employment income. So they look at the modified adjusted gross income on the Ohio income tax return. Um, it does not apply to retirement, social security benefits, unemployment, interest, dividends, or capital gains. There are two different types of school district income taxes that schools can ask their community for. One is traditional and one is earned income. Traditional does apply to all of those things. Earned income does not. So, I shared with
024the board previously estimates from the Ohio Department of Taxation who actually calculates the estimates for income taxes. I don't do that myself. Um and there was a much larger number had we done a traditional income tax versus a earned income tax. And so um that's what this is is the earned income tax. I just want to make sure that's clear. And so uh my recommendation for the November 4th ballot uh is the 75%. We had talked about um potentially looking at a 1.25%. That was because of the conversations around eliminating the inside millage for our local taxes. That's about 3.8 mills. It generates about 16.3 million a year. That difference in that percentage would have made up the difference in the um it had they eliminated the inside millillage. Uh not saying that that's not
025possible to happen in the future. There is legislation where that would provide for that should that pass, but that was not part of the budget bill conversations. There was talk about adding it to it. It didn't get added. Nothing has been passed. So my recommendation is that we move forward with the 75%. It would generate an estimated annual revenue of 23 24.3 million. Uh and it starts in calendar year 26 and we would realize full collection in fiscal year and the purpose to support daily operations. Could you just hit on the impact of the compounding effect of delaying collection of taxes? And so if we would have collected taxes two years previously compared to when this will kick in, what that impact is, please. >> If you think about u a property tax, we would
026have seen collections beginning as early as 26. um the calendar year because of the way we it phases in those collection the income taxes the way it phases in those collections we don't see those actual fullear collections until fiscal year 27. And so um as we're seeing you know the cost of doing business continue to rise that it does in the school district the same as does any business or organization. um just that year-over-year as we continue to see less revenues, higher expenses, um the need grows year-over-year. And so, uh but my recommendation for this issue, uh should we be on in November would be the 75%. Uh it would generate about 24.3 million depending on um I I can't stress this enough that this is an estimate. Uh I had gotten estimates from the
027Ohio Department of Taxation early on that said a 75% would be nearly 26 million. So this was a big shift just from estimates I got I received in April versus June. Um so this is it's very volatile. I do think this would allow an opportunity for growth in revenue should incomes grow. Um but at the same time, should incomes decline, it would also provide for a decline in revenue uh going forward. And you know, the conversation um with our a lot of the state lawmakers around diversifying our revenue and that we shouldn't be asking our community to continue to pass property taxes um and what that looks like. Uh I think that this is the best approach that we can. Our only options are to either um ask our community for a property tax levy,
028ask our community for an income tax levy, either traditional or earned income tax, or to make significant reductions to the school programming. I think we've reduced where we can. Uh, and you know, part of the conversation before the ballot issue, I would suggest that the board consider a very um concise list of things that would be reduced should we not be successful in November so that our community completely understands what this will pay for um should it pass. So, I think that that's important. So, yeah. Did that answer your question, Angie? Uh, so I've showed this before. I This was from a Legislative Services Commission member brief uh from February of 2025 and it the blue shows um school districts that have an active school district income tax. You can see how they're all spread
029out there. So, I did do like a zoom in. you can see where we fall. Uh they're in the middle. And then I listed all of the schools that have an income tax the first year they started. And then uh in the county that they're in for all of the surrounding counties um for Franklin and Delaware County where we reside. So I know it's kind of hard to read. Um I can send the board a list later so that you guys have something that you can read. I just wanted to get this out there so that you could see that. That's all I have. Are there any questions from the board? Um, Miss Marshall, you you've I think covered it well. I'm just wondering if you can um clarify for us so how the the
030number that was arrived at right in terms of 75 and that calculation you're talking about how it changed. >> Do you have an understanding from their estimate of how it changed? Are they looking at actual wages and a change in actual wages? >> They're looking at actual wages from because they have more current data to update those estimates. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, it can it can have quite a large swing when we're talking about earned income specifically. >> The 75 that you are suggesting is kind of the amount that will help us to cover that shortfall that we're looking at, right? >> Yeah. So when we look at um you know the where our revenues are today and where our expenses are today after all the reductions that we've made uh we
031know we're going to continue to see increase in costs as we continue to see just increase in inflation and student needs and all of those things. Um, just looking at uh, you know, fiscal year 25 alone, even after all of the reductions that we made, we were still deficit spending by about $8 million, a little bit over $8 million. This year will be about 1920 million. And this is after moving those other expenses out because we've moved the fund balance. Um but we're looking at about 20 to$ 24 million just over the next this year and next year by the time we would realize um full collections on that. And so, um, I think that while it won't completely get us out of deficit spending in the future, should our revenues from the state continue
032to look the way that they do, um, I think that it will be a more workable situation for us to be able to try to bring some of our costs down in the future. Um but without the adequate revenues to make up what we have right now, we're talking about making some significant programmatic changes that we'll want to um list out for the community. >> And that amount of shortfall that is not taking into account should the clawback come back or should you know the federal government just stop funding. >> No. So, it doesn't take into account anything with the federal funds going away um or the call back. I think it's important to understand that the call back um if if we were subject to that um cap on our carryover balance, we would
033be in a much different situation today since felling that levied last November um than what we were. Fortunately, we were able to make reductions without huge significant impacts to our student population. Um, but should that should we have not had the cash balance to help kind of float us through that difficult time, I think that we would be making having a much different conversation for sure. Thank you. >> I just I know um you know we heard we can only do this in increments of 0.25, right? And so this is why 0.5 wasn't enough and 75 is what we really need here to be able to be able to fill this deficit and still, you know, potentially not knowing what's coming at us um from the feds or the state because House Bill 335 still
034exists and that's where a lot of this other tax provisions are. House Bill 335, plus there's a lot of other standalone bills that have pieces and parts to that and they're all still sitting in in different committees. Um, and I think it's important to understand too, uh, that when we're looking at projections and, um, you know, talking about whether we're at a 75, we were actually between a 75 and a 1%. And we felt like we could adjust as needed with the 75% should we land there. Um, without unless we lost our inside millage and then that was the other the 1.25% 25% conversation. So after we got the updated figures, um we were initially thinking 0.5, but because of those updated figures, that's where we landed. >> And correct me if I'm wrong, Nicole,
035but um the veto line today would eliminate the possibility of an emergency levy if we needed one. If this 75 wasn't enough, is that correct? We would not be able to ask for an emergency levy. >> Yeah. So, the veto override today did eliminate the ability for school districts to ask for an emergency levy or a replacement levy um in the future. So, um it won't impact anything we currently have, but should we need to go back and ask for that, that's not an option in the future. So, >> um I just want to return real quickly. Excuse me. So, you talked about this is an earned income. um you know that's inflationary potentially if incomes go up. >> Excuse me. I just want to remind everyone that um property taxes are only inflationary on
036the inside mills, right? Um so that what we currently have in terms of property tax those voted mills not inflationary. So as costs go up, right? That's why with property taxes you constantly have to go back. Um so when legislators told us to diversify, I mean this is one of the things that's important is that there is potential for the income um portion to grow which is only a small portion of our local tax share. >> But just that's a difference. So I just want to be clear about that with folks. And then I'm just wondering, I don't expect that you have this number um handy, but do we know really what the real cost of services are that we provide to private and nonpublic charters? Like if we added those dollars up, transportation, intervention,
037like all the other services that we are required to provide. >> Um I don't know that I have that number off the top of my head. I um have I I don't have that off the top of my head. I I've looked at it in different periods of time throughout the years. It's definitely grown a lot. Um but yeah, I'd have to >> Yeah, that's okay. I wouldn't expect that that's a number that you update every five minutes, but um I think for me >> ever changing number >> Well, that's the thing, right? It's an everchanging number, but I think um understanding our best estimate of where that is now. I would appreciate knowing if we could update. Thanks. >> Uh the other thing I want to mention as part of the state's banium budget
038process is um the state is actually reducing the state income tax um by the second year of the bianium. it will be reduced by the 75% for anyone earning more than $100,000 um a year. So this would be an offset for those folks over that $100,000 mark um once they got past that mark. So um just throwing that out there as a note to make sure everybody's aware. And then uh the you know the whole conversation around property taxes I think we've heard lot loud and clear um from just not only our community but also as we've been around the state and having conversations with the lawmakers and you know there is a potential uh ballot initiative to eliminate completely abolished property taxes in the state of Ohio um that if they're not on the
039ballot this November they'reing going to be on the ballot in the spring. Um, I think that this is uh definitely one of the things that have has prompted our legislature to really take a look at property tax relief and reform and that whole conversation. Um, I don't disagree that we need property tax reform. We need property tax relief. I um have a whole host of things that I know the legislature has at least admitted to why they why our property tax system is broken. Um so I'm hoping that I can participate on the governor's work group that he's putting together um to help inform that conversation some. I think, you know, if we look at where we've been with the elimination of the tangible personal property taxes on businesses over years ago, um the continued
040shift um on uh with the tax abatements, the incentive financing agreements, the drop down LLC's, all of the special provisions in law that have sort of carved out the tax base and who's paying property taxes has really caused a huge shift um overall. And so we know that the property tax system is broken. I think um for the districts that aren't like ours and they're not subject to those House Bill 920 reduction factors, uh that's another big conversation, right? The districts that are at 20 mil floor and the tax increases that those communities are seeing. So that's not the same for our area, for a lot of the suburbs suburbs around here. Um, but I I don't think that the conversation about property tax reform is going away anytime soon. Even if they don't even
041if the legislature doesn't override the governor's vetos, I think we're going to continue to have this conversation. So, I'm hoping that this state can really do the work and make some real meaningful change for folks that need it. Um, and I'm hoping I can be part of that conversation. So, I'm trying to be on that committee. I just want to make sure you guys were aware of that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there was a committee that was put together and put together a very comprehensive list of suggestions for real property tax relief and none of those made it into the budget. >> Yeah. So, there was a joint commission but that was made up of um state senators and state house members. They met over it was during calendar year 2024. They had
042a series of hearings um where they heard from different folks and they uh gave a recommendation. They sent out a recommendation on December 31st, 2024. It had 22 recommendations I think um two and a half pages worth and the clawback provision there were a lot of provisions that were nowhere on that um on that recommendation. I think uh the governor's remarks with his vetos were they he wanted to create a work group that included all stakeholders and not just members of the legislature um to take a look at this which I think I appreciate it anyway. Um, and I I do want to make sure everybody understands too, um, you know, when the conversation surrounds property taxes, people tend to focus on public schools, but property taxes fund a lot more than just public schools.
043For the most part, uh, for our community, you probably pay about 60% of your tax bill to your to the local school district versus 40% goes to various other taxing jurisdictions as well. So, um, it's not just a school conversation if we're talking about adjusting property taxes and having property tax reform. >> And there's only two ways that we can raise money, right? Besides the state and the feds, but those are property taxes and >> income tax >> and income tax. And so, we've been told, as we've said, by the legislature to diversify. >> Yeah. We are listening to our community and we're listening to the legislature and and what's potentially coming at us too, >> right? >> Thanks. >> I just want to add to I think it's important to note that um you
044know we would love to see a different type of funding mechanism in our state. Other states fund schools differently. um the fact that school districts have to go back on the ballot and engage in those kind of conversations quite frankly distracts from the work that we're trying to do for our kids. And so um you know it is at this point the way schools are funded in Ohio and it is necessary. But I think it's important to note that you know we do have to spend a lot of time um on educating and and communicating about this issue and previous issues versus being able to focus on what we need to do for our kids and our staff. So I I just want to note that because I think sometimes maybe people, you know, lose
045sight of the fact that this is not our core business going out and trying to raise money. Our core business is to educate kids. >> And should the economy shrink um or remain stagnant, we wouldn't be able to keep pace with our income by adding this. Correct. Like if we were enter, heaven forbid, but people go on unemployment, that wouldn't be taxable. we would if people have lost their jobs. So, this is a much more dynamic component to I mean hopefully the economy grows and ergo our our revenue continues to meet our expenses. Uh but if it were to shrink, we would have a be back here having this discussion about the tough choices. Correct. >> Yeah, it's definitely a more volatile source of revenue than um property taxes are. I think a lot of
046districts during the last recession saw a decrease in their overall revenue from their income taxes because incomes dropped at that time. Um, so that's always a possibility in the future too. So this is again just trying to diversify uh the revenue that we do have and maybe have an opportunity to see some growth in revenue in the future should income grow. Um because right now we don't really have that much with property taxes because that inside Millage is the only piece that we see growth on. >> Sorry. And in terms of property taxes, Westville as a whole is a bit landlocked. Like we don't have a lot of expansion left to potentially grow property tax base like some other districts do. Um, we don't, yeah, we don't have a ton, but I do think there
047are different various parts that have a little bit of opportunities for development, but it it depends on what kind of tax incentive agreements are put into place before that happens and what that looks like. >> I think it's important to note too that if it's residential development, typically an individual home does not pay enough in taxes to cover the cost of educating those kids, which is um, challenging. So that's where you want that more of the commercial or industrial type revenue to offset that as well. Any other Thank you for all of that discussion. Any other questions or comments? Are we ready to take a vote? >> All right. Would you call the vote, please? >> Mrs. Alman, >> yes. >> Mr. Aleman, >> yes. >> Mrs. Valentine, >> yes. >> Mrs. Meyer, >> yes.
048Next up, we have personal consent agenda. And can we take this as one? >> So moved. >> Okay. Oh, may may I have a motion to take the personal consent agenda 5.01 through 5.09 as well? >> So moved. >> Thank you. Second, and welcome, Mr. Reeves. >> Thank you very much and good evening. We have a light consent agenda this evening uh compared to some of the others this summer. I'd like to present for you for your consideration tonight's personnel consent agenda. Along with the regular action items in tonight's agenda, there are a couple of items I'd like to call out. We have resignations. We have four classified resignations and six licensed teacher resignations as well as one administrative resignation from an elementary school, Huba Ridge, uh which we are also uh considering the replacement
049for that position as well. We have one-time pays. We are still finishing up our summer trainings for both our classified and some of our licensed teachers as we are preparing for their return in a few weeks. Um, we'd like to welcome four new classified and six new licensed hires to Westerville City Schools. And we'd also like to welcome a new assistant principal to Huber Ridge Elementary School, Leah Cobb, who cannot join us tonight, but we are excited to have her uh and missed her today at our all admin training. And lastly, we have one single solitary retirement for consideration, and that's school counselor Nancy Shawn, who's retiring with 23 years of service to the district. Nancy began her service to Westerville in 2002 when Salt Lake City hosted the Winter Olympics. A beautiful mind won
050best picture. Xbox took the world by storm and Westerville schools open FA and Alcott elementary schools. be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> I just want to clarify it's Naomi, not Nancy. >> Nancy, I'm sorry. >> Thank you. And congratulations to her. >> Thank you. >> Any questions or comments? >> I do enjoy the history lessons again. Thank you. >> Yes. And my apologies, Naomi. >> Take the vote. Yeah. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Altman. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Valentine. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Meyer. >> Yes. Um and uh the board will meet in regular session on Monday, August 11th, 2025 at 6 PM at the early learning center, which is here. Um and with that, may I have a motion to enter into executive session for the purposes of discussing
051the employment and compensation of a plebe employee? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Take the vote. >> Mrs. Saltman, >> yes. >> Mrs. Mrs. Valentine. >> Yes. >> Mr. Heckleman. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Meyer. >> Yes. All right. You're welcome to stay or >> if you want to go.