Levy FAQs

Bellefontaine City Schools is proposing a 1% earned school district income tax on a continuing basis. If approved by voters in November 2026, collections would begin in January 2027.

The latest Ohio Department of Taxation estimate provided to the district, using Tax Year 2024 information, calculates approximately $3.5 million in annual revenue once collections are fully established.

Source: District-provided levy information, August 2026.

No. The proposal is an earned school district income tax, not an increase in school property-tax millage. The amount paid would be based on qualifying earned income rather than the value of a person’s home.

Source: Levy committee talking points; district-provided levy information.

At a 1% rate, the calculation is $10 for every $1,000 of taxable earned income. The examples below are simple illustrations; a taxpayer’s actual taxable earned income may differ from total household income.

Source: 1% arithmetic examples; levy committee talking points

School district income taxes are residence-based. A resident who lives within the Bellefontaine City School District boundaries would be subject to the tax on qualifying earned income regardless of where that person works.

Source: District-provided levy information, August 2026.

The location of the employer does not determine whether a resident is subject to the school district income tax. If a taxpayer resides within the Bellefontaine City School District, the tax is residence-based and would apply to qualifying earned income.

Source: District-provided levy information, August 2026.

Generally, retirement income and investment earnings would not be taxable under the proposed earned-income structure. Individual circumstances can vary, so taxpayers with questions should consult a tax professional or official Ohio Department of Taxation guidance.

Source: District-provided levy information; levy committee talking points.

Not necessarily. A retiree whose income consists only of income that is excluded from the earned-income tax base generally would not owe the tax on that excluded income. A retiree who continues to receive qualifying earned income could be subject to the tax on that earned income.

Source: District-provided levy information; levy committee talking points.

An additional property-tax levy was considered. The district determined that another property-tax proposal was not the most viable option because of significant recent changes to Ohio property-tax law and uncertainty surrounding additional state-level proposals affecting property taxes.

An earned-income tax also broadens the local tax base beyond property ownership: residents with qualifying earned income contribute whether they own a home, rent, or have another housing arrangement.

Source: District-provided levy information; FY27 August Forecast property-tax reform disclosures.

The district’s latest forecast shows a structural gap between recurring revenues and recurring expenditures. Without new levy revenue, the August FY27 forecast projects annual deficits throughout the forecast period and a negative year-end cash balance beginning in FY29.

The issue is not simply whether the district has cash today. The issue is whether recurring revenue can keep pace with the recurring cost of operating the school system over time.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast, Forecast Summary and Five-Year Forecast.

Without new SDIT revenue, the current forecast projects the following General Fund path (renewal revenue is included where modeled):

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast, page 3 / Five-Year Forecast. Values rounded.

The latest forecast actually assumes that expenditure growth will slow compared with recent history. Over the prior five-year period, expenditures increased by an average of 4.89% annually. The forecast projects average annual expenditure growth of 2.65% through FY31.

The problem is that projected base revenue growth is even weaker: the forecast projects average annual revenue change of approximately -0.08% over the same period. In other words, spending is projected to grow more slowly than it has historically, but still faster than revenue.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast, Expenditure Overview and Forecast Summary.

Schools are personnel-intensive organizations. In the current forecast, salaries represent 58.20% of General Fund expenditures and employee benefits represent 24.39%. Together, salaries and benefits account for roughly 83% of General Fund spending.

Purchased services account for about 12.17%. Supplies, capital outlay, other objects, and other financing uses make up the remaining share.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast with SDIT modeled, Expenditure Overview.

Yes. The FY2024 and FY2025 financial reports state that the district has made budget reductions dating back to FY2006, with the majority of personnel-related reductions made through attrition where possible. The reports also state that additional reductions made in summer 2019 helped stabilize the forecast and produce budget surpluses.

The reports further state that the Board continues to scrutinize expenditures, pupil-teacher ratios, and class sizes when evaluating future staffing needs.

Source: Bellefontaine City School District FY2024 and FY2025 cash-basis financial statements, Management’s Discussion and Analysis.

General Fund cash disbursements increased by 1.52% in FY2024 compared with FY2023 and by only 0.87% in FY2025 compared with FY2024. In FY2025, instruction spending decreased 0.71% while support-service spending increased 3.48%.

Those results provide context for the question of whether the district has been controlling spending: recent actual General Fund expenditure growth has been comparatively modest even as the long-term forecast has weakened.

Source: FY2024 and FY2025 cash-basis financial statements, Management’s Discussion and Analysis.

Large recurring reductions would eventually affect the areas that make up most of the budget. Because salaries and benefits account for about 83% of General Fund spending, a multi-million-dollar recurring reduction cannot realistically be achieved entirely through office supplies, small contracts, or other minor line items.

The district should continue seeking efficiencies regardless of the levy outcome, but the scale of the projected deficits means significant expenditure-only solutions would eventually involve staffing levels or services.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast with SDIT modeled, Expenditure Overview; FY2024-FY2025 financial statements.

State funding is a major component of the General Fund. In the FY27 forecast, unrestricted state aid alone accounts for 49.51% of General Fund revenue. Restricted state aid and state property-tax reimbursements add additional state-supported revenue.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast, Unrestricted Grants-in-Aid.

Beginning in FY2022, Ohio adopted the Fair School Funding Plan. The forecast explains that the plan funds students where they are educated and eliminated certain tuition-transfer payments from school districts. That reduced some district tuition costs, but it also changed how per-pupil state revenue flows.

The FY2024 and FY2025 financial reports described the first-year overall effect for BCS as slightly positive, while also noting uncertainty about the long-term effect.

Source: FY27 August Forecast; FY2024 and FY2025 cash-basis financial statements.

Yes. The latest forecast shows district-educated enrollment declining from 2,184 students in FY2022 to 2,044 in FY2027, with the forecast reaching 1,958 by FY2031. Because the state funding formula uses district-educated enrollment, enrollment changes affect state funding.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast, Unrestricted Grants-in-Aid.

The FY27 forecast incorporates recent property-tax reforms, including H.B. 129, H.B. 186, H.B. 335, and provisions of H.B. 96. The forecast notes that state and county officials are still working through implementation and that assumptions may change as details are finalized.

The current forecast identifies real-estate revenue as the largest contributor to the changing revenue trend. Average annual real-estate revenue growth is projected to be about $452,000 lower than the district’s historical trend.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast, Forecast Summary and Property Tax Reform disclosures.

No. Ohio’s school property-tax system includes mechanisms that limit how certain voted operating levies grow as property values change. Recent property-tax reform legislation has added additional limits and credits in some circumstances.

The district’s forecast therefore does not assume that higher market values translate dollar-for-dollar into the same percentage growth in school operating revenue.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast, Property Tax Reform retrospective/prospective analyses.

It would substantially improve the district’s financial position, but it would not permanently eliminate the underlying gap between revenue growth and expenditure growth.  With the SDIT modeled, the forecast keeps the year-end General Fund cash balance positive through FY31. However, expenditures begin to outpace total revenue again, and the FY31 annual operating shortfall is approximately $1.15 million.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast with SDIT modeled, Forecast Summary.

The modeled scenario phases in new levy collections as the tax begins and receipts build. The forecast uses $206,500 in FY27, $2.464 million in FY28, $3.721 million in FY29, and $3.962 million in FY30 and FY31 as new-levy revenue assumptions.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast with SDIT modeled, Forecast Summary. Values rounded.

The $3.5 million figure is the latest Ohio Department of Taxation estimate provided to the district using TY2024 information. The forecast scenario uses a separate modeling assumption that reaches $3.962 million annually in FY30 and FY31. School district income tax revenue will grow as the community’s average household income increases. The forecasting software used assumes and models a slight increase in this statistic.

Source: District-provided ODT estimate; FY27 August BCS Forecast with SDIT modeled.

No. The modeled ending cash balance stays in a relatively narrow range for several years: approximately $4.91 million in FY27, $4.66 million in FY28, $4.87 million in FY29, $4.76 million in FY30, and $3.61 million in FY31.

The scenario therefore shows the SDIT stabilizing cash reserves for a period rather than creating an ever-growing balance.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast with SDIT modeled, Forecast Summary.

No definitive conclusion can be drawn today. Five-year forecasts change as actual revenues, expenditures, enrollment, state budgets, tax law, and labor costs change.

The current modeled scenario shows that the SDIT would provide substantial financial stability, but it also shows the need for continued cost management and long-range planning because expenditures again exceed revenue by the end of the forecast period.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast with SDIT modeled; forecast methodology.

According to the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce’s 2024-25 District Spend Per Pupil report, Bellefontaine City Schools reported $10,583 in expenditures per equivalent pupil. The statewide figure was $12,759.

That places BCS approximately $2,176 per equivalent pupil, or 17.1%, below the statewide figure.

Source: ODEW 2024-25 District Spend Per Pupil report.

Among the comparison districts identified by the levy committee, Bellefontaine has the lowest expenditures per equivalent pupil in the ODEW 2024-25 dataset. The peer-group average shown below is approximately $11,652, which is about 9.2% above Bellefontaine’s $10,583.

In the 607-district ODEW dataset provided, Bellefontaine’s $10,583 figure is the 44th-lowest expenditure per equivalent pupil. About 93% of districts in the dataset report a higher figure.

This measure does not prove that every individual expenditure is optimal, but it provides useful context: BCS is not a high-spending outlier on ODEW’s per-pupil spending measure.

Source: Calculation from ODEW 2024-25 District Spend Per Pupil report.

Yes. A cash balance, however, is not the same as a structurally balanced operating budget. The FY27 forecast begins with a General Fund balance of approximately $6.24 million and shows that balance being consumed over time when annual expenditures exceed annual revenues.

Without the new SDIT, the forecast projects the balance turning negative in FY29. With the SDIT modeled, the balance remains positive through FY31.

Source: FY27 August Forecasts, with and without SDIT modeled.

The current forecast without new SDIT revenue projects a negative year-end General Fund cash balance beginning in FY29 and approximately negative $10.7 million by FY31, even after the currently modeled renewal revenue.

A school district cannot operate indefinitely with a negative cash balance. If the financial path does not improve through additional revenue, lower expenditures, or both, the district would eventually have to make material budget reductions.

Source: FY27 August BCS Forecast; levy committee question set.