School district to ask for supplemental levy

Wednesday, December 25, 2013

The Mountain Home School District will ask voters this March to renew the supplemental levy it needs to maintain programs in the district.

The district will seek approval of $2.7 million each year for two years, the same as the voters approved two years ago, "so there's no increase in taxes," Supt. Tim McMurtrey said.

This would be the third time the district has sought a two-year supplemental levy since the legislature drastically cut funding to education in 2008, in response to the national economic meltdown. Currently, less than a dozen of the 113 school districts in the state do not use a supplemental levy to support their programs.

"When the legislature wouldn't provide the funding, they just passed the responsibility down to the local school districts and taxpayers," said school board chairman Jim Alexander. Still, those cuts by the legislature were so severe that school districts all over Idaho, including the Mountain Home School District, were forced to cut programs and saw classroom sizes rise.

Alexander said there were rumors the legislature might restore funding to 2007 levels, "but they might not, and frankly, I'd be surprised if they did." If the legislature did suddenly decide to restore funding back to pre-recession levels, the district wouldn't need the levy.

"We can always levy less than we've asked for, but we can't levy more, so we're going this route to be safe," he said.

The school district also is asking for the earliest possible date on the elections calendar "because we're tired of scrambling at the last minute" to put together a budget, McMurtrey said. Budgets have to be wrapped up by law in June but the legislature usually doesn't complete its work until the end of April or early May. Also, Alexander noted, if the voters reject the measure it gives the district the May election or even the August election dates to try again.

The district's assistant superintendent, James Gilbert, not that the proposed levy is designed "just to maintain operations as they are."

If the levy fails, the district does not want to cut any more programs. "We're trying to keep kids in school. Why cut the programs that keeps them there," McMurtrey said. The district, he noted, simply doesn't want to cut any more programs after it had been forced to slash and burn in 2008.

If the levy doesn't pass, however, the district has two options -- it can cut staff, or it can cut student contact days (when kids are in class).

"I don't want to cut staff, McMurtrey said, "because I've already got some elementary school classrooms with 32-33 kids in them, and that's ridiculous.

"But we either have to cut staff, or cut days," he said, since teacher salaries represent better than four out of every five dollars spent by the district.

Cutting days means the teachers (and administrators) take a pay cut, and students spend less time in school.

"We hope the public will support maintaining the student contact days" by supporting the levy," Gilbert said.

The district's original school year was 190 days, but after 2008 the district furloughed teachers for five of those days and administrators for ten. All the classroom days for students have been restored, but the fewer days have meant fewer professional development days, which concerns McMurtrey because teachers need training in how to implement the new Common Core standards and design their curriculum for the testing that goes with that multi-state curriculum standards program.

In addition to the supplemental levy that the district is asking voters to renew, the district also has an emergency levy it put into place this fall when the district's enrollment unexpectedly rose by more than 100 students. That levy disappears in July "and we don't anticipate an extra 100 students next fall," McMurtrey said, so it will not be renewed.

The district also no longer has a plant facilities levy. Although voters had approved the levy every two years for 50 years, four years ago they rejected the levy that helps maintain the districts aging buildings, opting to approve a supplemental levy, instead. Since the supplemental levy is seen by district officials as having priority, despite the need for building repairs, they haven't come back to ask the voters to approve both.

But those aren't the only issues the district faces that impact it's budget.

The district entered this year with a $960,000 shortfall due to Impact Aid money it hasn't received. Typically, the district budgets $2 million to $3 million in Impact Aid funds, based on the formulas set by Congress.

But last year, sequester caused ten percent of that money to be held back, and then, while Congress had authorized a large Impact Aid budget for schools (to cover costs for significant populations of students that live on military bases or reservations), it didn't actually appropriate the money for the authorization, which the district had counted on when setting its budget.

Eventually, district comptroller Cliff Ogborn said, Congress and the Pentagon usually get around to making the payments good, but sometimes the money can be years late, and that's what's causing the current negative balance in the district finances.

"Right now, we're in trouble," McMurtrey admitted. "But we think that will work out in time."

The Impact Aid shortfall aside however, McMurtrey said it is critical that the district get the supplemental levy approved by the voters, which matches very closely the amount of money that used to be raised by the old Operations and Maintenance property tax, which the legislature took away from the school districts in 2007.

"That's the critical one. Without it, we're either looking at cutting teacher salaries again, or putting more students in classrooms that already are overcrowded. We don't want to do either of those things."

"We're asking that the voters support local education -- because the legislature won't," Alexander added.

Comments
View 8 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • You did an emergency levy---which voters do not get to vote on. Now you want another supplemental levy on top of it. I am wondering when people will wise up and vote no. Better cut some stuff boys. Times are tough. Our MHSD Board sucks. They all need replaced.

    Words od wisdom from good old Jim Alexander:

    Alexander said there were rumors the legislature might restore funding to 2007 levels, "but they might not, and frankly, I'd be surprised if they did." If the legislature did suddenly decide to restore funding back to pre-recession levels, the district wouldn't need the levy.

    "We can always levy less than we've asked for, but we can't levy more, so we're going this route to be safe," he said.

    -- Posted by OpinionMissy on Thu, Dec 26, 2013, at 9:00 AM
  • I must be thinking of something else but I thought the supplemental levies we voted for previously were to maintain the buildings and grounds? This one is for programs? How many supplemental levies are out there by this school district?

    -- Posted by GetRealNow on Sat, Dec 28, 2013, at 11:02 AM
  • *

    Why can't the teacher staff get the required training in June/July?

    -- Posted by dan_eilers@msn.com on Sun, Dec 29, 2013, at 10:49 PM
  • They have the 2.7 million that was voted on twice---and another one for nearly 500K that was NOT voted on but implemented by the MHSD this year as an "Emergency levy." CHA CHING!!!

    We need a daycare center for the MHSD Board---they are like a bunch of children with an open piggy bank. Sky is the limit with spending for them.

    -- Posted by OpinionMissy on Mon, Dec 30, 2013, at 12:51 PM
  • $960,000.00 shortfall because 10% of impact aid was held back. 10% of 3 million is $300,000.00 ???? Isn't that less than 1/3 of the shortfall? Millions of dollars are being tossed around like $20 bills. How many days would be cut from school, and how much would that save?? How much of a pay cut would teachers take? And how much would that save?? Could there be some sort of compromise or trade there?? Which programs would be cut and how much would that save?? What types of repairs need to be done, and how much would they cost??? Some of us tax payers would like to see REAL numbers, and possibly compare some of these numbers to other districts. You can have two like house holds each bringing in $30,000.00 per year. One can live comfortably with reserves in the bank, while the other deals with financial shortages prior to each pay period. Management of money and accountability is VERY important. How does Mountain Home fair in these regards. Some tax payers would like to SEE facts. Not listen to stories.

    -- Posted by dudewheresmycar on Mon, Dec 30, 2013, at 3:56 PM
  • Oh my goodness! Here come all the MHSD haters again. If you all can do a better job, then I suggest you all get up and go run for their seats when they come open. Missy, while I do agree with you on matters about the WECRD, with regards to the MHSD you drive me crazy. Dude, you need to re-read the article. You are right 10% of $3,000,000 is $300,000. He said the $960,000 shortfall was because they didn't receive the Impact Aid funds yet, because CONGRESS, while they did approve the funding has not appropriated the funding yet. When they release the funds we will get that money. That is the big government working at its best. Most of the numbers to the questions you are asking are readily available at the school district office. Just go in and ask, get the information. All the budget numbers are available to the public. Every dime has to be accounted for. Then I challenge all of you to go tour the schools, see where the cuts were made, see where they impact the kids. See what kind of shape our schools are in. Then, go to another school in the Boise area, one with the same amount of students; see what they have compared to what our kids have. The Boise schools will put our schools to shame every time. Everyone acts like our district is the only one that has budget shortfalls and that our administrators can't budget our money. Tell you what, do a little more research and see how many school districts in just the Treasure Valley have had to ask their local voters for levies. You will see it is a lot. We are not the only one! This is all put on us because of the people up in the State House and in Washington. If you want to yell, yell at them! Vote in someone else. The school board is being honest with you, they need more money to maintain what they have going. They are actually doing more with less; the new Common Core will put more strain on the budget due to more requirements for the kids and staff. My taxes aren't going to go up, unless my property value actually goes up. (I don't see that happening in the near future). So I don't see where your taxes are going to be going up. They will stay the same. Actually they will go down because the MHSD is not asking to renew that emergency levy. The other positive part of actually having the levy is, at least I know my money is actually going to the kids in our town. When we pay state taxes we are funding kids in other communities as well. The money is staying local. The influx of kids will be part of the next budget. I won't comment on the daycare at BMHS, I haven't done my research on it yet, but I will, and then I will form my own opinion on it. It just takes a little time and effort to learn what is going on.

    -- Posted by MHMomof 3 on Mon, Dec 30, 2013, at 7:49 PM
  • I am not a MHSD hater. I love Mountain Home. Rather, I am a contributing stock holder in a company known as MHSD. You won't find it on the stock exchange, for it is privately owned by the tax payers of Elmore County. We graciously allow ownership in this company to the residents of Elmore County that do not contribute financially. The school admin. and board work for us. We fund the daily operations of this company. All I ask for is financial accountability. When my employees come to me and constantly tell me they don't have enough money to run the company, I want to know why. The government has been an unreliable source of income for (as my employees tell me) 6 years or better. I ask the question-then why do we include this money in our annual budget if there is no probability of receiving it??? How do our finances compare to other districts. How does our management compare to some of the more successful districts. Are there other alternatives that we can explore?? If we cut school days, how much will that save?? If we cut programs, how much will that save?? Are there viable programs available that we may out source some of our services that we provide to possibly save money??? Are there other ways of generating revenue from all owners of this company, and lessening the burden to the owners that actually fund the expenses (property owners)?? Some operations cannot stay status quo. What are our options?? Any room for compromise?? I expect more from the management team of my company. I love Mountain Home, but we need to be pay a little more attention to the long term sustainability of our company MHSD. As an owner, I do not mind providing additional funding, but this does nothing for the long term.

    As owners, we need to know what successful school districts (not all are financial disasters) are doing and learn from this.

    -- Posted by dudewheresmycar on Tue, Dec 31, 2013, at 12:31 PM
  • *

    MHMOMOF3,

    Here is what you are not getting...

    1. This was a two year TEMPORARY LEVY that has gone on for 4 years; now they want more.

    2. My family as others have had to cut back, loss of a job, reduction in pay, no cost of living increase in retirement, and other reasons peoples income has dropped while daily costs go up. Why doesn't the school board make more cuts? They water all the time, they leave lights on in school even when they are empty, they have land they could sell...(I know they are waiting for the price to rise...what a joke).

    3. There is bad miss-management happening and what really upsets me is they hide behind children like little cowards to get more. The worst part is people still fall for their lies.

    2 year temporary levy my butt...they want it to be a steady thing.

    -- Posted by Trouble2011 on Tue, Dec 31, 2013, at 1:01 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: