Manatee voters approved a school tax hike in 2018. Will they repeat that in 2021?

The School Board of Manatee County is working to renew a voter-approved tax increase before it expires in less than two years.

Voters approved the one-mill increase on property taxes in March 2018. The increase is set to expire on June 30, 2022, and the board is hoping to approach voters this November to get a four-year renewal passed.

They also hope to learn from past years and improve the ballot before it hits the Board of County Commissioners and the supervisor of elections. That discussion continued at Friday’s school board workshop.

Mary Foreman, the board’s newest member, started by questioning the millage amount. One mill is equal to $1 for every $1,000 of a home’s value, and according to Foreman, there was no clear reason for the number brought to voters in 2018.

She felt district leaders and school board members chose one mill simply because the law allowed it, and because Sarasota Public Schools have enjoyed a one-mill levy since 2002.

“We’ve got to look at what we’re spending and our budget and determine, how much do we need?” Foreman said. “As you all know, the one mill was set because you could and because Sarasota could. I think that’s a pretty poor reason.”

Foreman also cautioned the board to not oversell the referendum when it came time for a renewal vote. She pointed to a March 3 report by the Citizens’ Financial Oversight Committee, a volunteer group that reviews Manatee’s collection and spending of the added tax revenue.

“No preliminary conclusions can be drawn at this time regarding the success of the Resolution in accomplishing its goals,” the report states, noting that more time and data were needed.

“Much more information is required before any definitive conclusions can be drawn,” the report continues. “It is vital that the District takes a more hands-on approach with measuring the relevant outcomes of the Resolution and using that information to guide their decision making.”

In response to Foreman’s concern, Superintendent Cynthia Saunders said the benefits of the referendum — including higher salaries and 30 extra minutes of daily class time — had undoubtedly led to student success.

“That will be part of our conversations when we’re going out and explaining how it did have a positive impact on the district,” she said.

Foreman’s desire to reconsider the millage amount received little discussion on Friday. Instead, board members focused on how they might use the added tax revenue, which is sure to increase with rising home values.

Revenue from the millage, which totaled more than $40 million in 2019-2020, is split between six categories:

• Instructional staff — 51 percent.
• Hourly, non-bargaining staff and American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — 8 percent.
• School administrators and eligible SAMP (supervisory, administrative, managerial and professional) staff — 6 percent.
• Paraprofessionals — 5 percent.
• STEM and technical education programs — 15.5 percent.
• Charter schools — 14.5 percent.

Board member Scott Hopes said the percentages were too rigid. No matter how much money they collected, 51 percent would always go to instructional staff, 5 percent to paraprofessionals and so forth.

In its current form, the referendum gave no ability to add money where it was most needed. That could be especially harmful as tax revenue continues to climb, Hopes said.

“What the builders are telling me is they can’t build the houses fast enough for all the people who want to move here,” he said.

“I do agree that we need to tinker with those percentages and maybe that format,” Vice-Chair Charlie Kennedy followed.

Board member Gina Messenger said the superintendent could review and report on the district’s needs. In turn, the board could then discuss those needs and report to the community.

She also noted that more property taxes would not guarantee a windfall of extra money for the district. Messenger represents Parrish, where development is booming, and many newcomers have children.

“Yes, there’s more houses and that’s more revenue,” Messenger said. “But that also means more teachers, more bus drivers, more cafeteria people.”

The school board will also have to decide if contract schools get a slice of the revenue. The district contracts with nearly a dozen sites that provide local students with an alternative education, but none benefit from the one mill levy.

Just for Girls teaches students who need a different approach after struggling in traditional classrooms. Forced to keep up with the school district, Just for Girls raised salaries and extended the school day — a financial burden for schools not covered by the referendum.

The board conversation — including how to win over voters, how to allocate the money and whether to include contract schools — will continue in the months ahead.

This story was originally published January 30, 2021 at 5:00 AM.