FACTS/Bond issue FAQs:

The following questions were compiled by FACTS. The answers come from Revere
Superintendent Matt Montgomery and Chief Financial Officer Dave Forrest; FACTS edited the answers for space and clarity. If you have questions not addressed here, please email faq@wearerevere.com and we will get the answer and post it on subsequent updates.

The Revere School District is part of our community and part of our future. After an extensive community engagement process that spanned more than a year, the decision was made to invest in our deteriorating school buildings. This bond issue would raise $68.2 million over a 30-year period to build a new high school and new Bath Elementary School while making renovations to Hillcrest Elementary and Revere Middle School. Projections show it will only cost less than $8 per month per $100,000 home (appraised value on your Summit County Fiscal Office property card).
The annual cost for Issue 45, which is a 4.1-mill, 30-year proposal, would be $143.50 annually per $100,000 home. Because an existing 1.59-mill bond issue will end in December, taxpayers will see a “net,” or new, increase of $87.85 annually, if the issue is approved.

The 30­ year ­bond, if passed, will raise $68.2 million for the district. Because we have an existing bond that has been refinanced twice to lower the rate, and which will be paid off in December 2016, the cost increase for a homeowner is only projected to be less than $8 per month per $100,000 home. In other words, the taxpayer is currently paying 1.59 mills or $4.64 per month for the existing bond issue that is being retired and that payment will figuratively be redirected towards the new bond. See the below chart.

The existing bond, which will be paid in full, was approved by the community in 1992 and was used to fund district­-wide building renovations.

Mills Annual Monthly
Require Cost Cost
Total Mills for Bond Bond @ $68.2 M, 30 Yrs,
4.1 Mills
4.10 $143.50 $11.96
Currently Paying Current Bond @ 1.59 Mills (1.59) $55.65 $4.64
Cost Increase to Taxpayer Additional Amount @ 2.51 Mills 2.51 $87.85 $7.32

This is the fiscally responsible action. Just as you would never invest significant dollars into a car repair when the car is at the end of its usefulness, it just is not fiscally responsible to make huge investments into deteriorating school buildings that will soon need to be replaced anyway. Bond rates are also at historic lows, making this the perfect time for an investment in our future. Having high ­quality schools that attract families also significantly impacts property values. We also need facilities that support 21st century learning, which focuses on spaces that allow communication, collaboration, creativity and critical thinking to occur in robust ways. We also need buildings with enhanced safety features. To protect our kids from modern threats, we need facilities that are safe. We need to provide a level of security that is consistent with other successful school districts (for example, creating vestibules in each building for added security).

The district has basic layout drawings of the plans, which Superintendent Matt Montgomery shared during his State of the Schools address this spring. They can also be seen here. Full renderings of the proposed buildings will be completed when the bond issue is successful.

There have been many conversations about this question among stakeholders (including the Revere Board of Education, administration, Facilities Committee and strategic planning forums.) While the building plans will not be developed until the bond passes, the architect will work closely with the district to create areas for community use. These areas could be meeting rooms, indoor walking tracks, etc. Our hope is to make the building accessible to the community
as much as possible.

Some examples could include:
1) Wadsworth Schools have an indoor walking track above the gyms.
2) Collaborative classrooms with movable furniture on wheels, which will easily convert a
classroom to alternate­use spaces such as community meeting rooms or a place for fitness
classes.

Absolutely. The community is able to use the facilities now. As noted above, the planning process will focus on how to expand on the community space which is available to our residents.

The plans are continually evolving and will not be finalized until after the bond passage. The major decisions that have been made are building a new high school and Bath building and the partial renovation of Hillcrest and the Middle School.

The committee spent much time on this very question. After extensive dialogue about the
pros and cons of a single campus, it was decided to keep Bath at its existing location. The main
reason is the limited space available and the logistics of transportation for day­to­day activities
and special events. There were concerns about safety as well. The committee even explored
the option of adding a second floor to Hillcrest, but the district’s architect strongly advised
against it because the building was not designed to support a second level. Moreover, the cost
of reinforcing the first level to support a second floor would be prohibitive

The district has a standing Audit and Finance Committee composed of three community members, two Board of Education members, the superintendent and chief financial officer. The committee meets quarterly for the purpose of reviewing financial reports, developing updated operational procedures based upon the annual audit report and to validate assumptions tied to financial projections. Participation is open to parents and community members with financial and accounting experience.The number of participants grew dramatically for this initiative.

The Facilities Committee initially started with two subcommittees, which were later combined into one Master Facilities Advisory Group. One subcommittee dealt with the financial components of a bond issue, including borrowing limits, the interest­rate environment, financing options/strategies and borrowing capacity based on current total millage. This committee was made up of six community members with financial experience, two board members, a consultant from Lesko Architecture and the district’s chief financial officer. The second subcommittee was made up of community members with facility experience and initially undertook a detailed look at the condition, operational limitations and future instructional needs of district facilities. These two committees shared findings with each other and were later combined.

The committees (both finance and facilities) were made up of more than 35 members. They included representatives from Bath, Copley, and Richfield. There were parents, senior citizens, business owners, booster club members, staff members and local officials. The committees met throughout the 2015-­2016 school year, starting in the fall and finishing in the spring.

The community input came from both the finance and facilities committees. Additionally, the district received feedback gained from listening tours conducted with all stakeholders including, but not limited to, teachers, students, administration, board members, parents and community and business leaders. There were 21 public meetings asking for input.
Lastly, while the phone poll from last fall was not specifically focused on the building project, those surveyed voluntarily provided additionally feedback on this topic.

Our Board of Education and administrative team have done a great job to keep the schools maintained, but with any facility that gets a significant amount of use, there are times when major improvements or a replacement needs to be made. This is true for both the high school and Bath Elementary. The school board had a study conducted by the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission http://ofcc.ohio.gov/ to assess the condition of Revere’s facilities. While we do a great job of ongoing maintenance, understanding the overall health of each facility is important and financially responsible.

Many of our residents are very familiar with the high school and have visited it during numerous activities. Most people do not realize that our high school’s original construction dates back to 1951 and includes six separate additions (1956, 1963, 1967, 1970, 1982 and 1994.) This creates a facility with an inconsistent layout, outdated mechanical (heating, electrical, lighting), 31 different roofs, poor finishes (doors and hallways) and limited ability for security improvements. The building also does not meet federal requirements for the Americans with Disabilities Act. The cost for the recommended repairs was just $22.4 million. The cost for a new facility is $35.3 million. These recommendations and plans for new buildings were reviewed by a facilities committee consisting of Revere community members (many with construction and facilities backgrounds) to determine the best course of action (Tim Militzer, co-chair of FACTS, was part of that group). A separate finance committee (Dave Gifford, FACTS’ other co-chair) reviewed our current finances and borrowing capacity and provided the recommendation to the school board on the total amount that we budgeted for this work. With the historically low interest rates, this has been the best time to borrow money and waiting to make the improvements would decrease the total amount of the bond and limit the improvements that could be made. Based on these factors, facility improvement recommendations were made, including the replacement of the current high school building and Bath Elementary.
Please also see the answer to the next question about Bath Elementary.

Bath Elementary, built in 1923 with additions in 1952 and 1967, does not have access that meets federal requirements for the Americans with Disabilities Act, including appropriate auxiliary spaces such as a gym and auditorium. Also at Bath, there are only bathrooms on the first floor of a three-story building. Our students in wheelchairs must be taken outside of the building in order to be moved to different floors.
With a three-story building and only a few rooms equipped with window air-conditioning units, it is extremely uncomfortable in the warm months, which stifles instruction. Infrastructure for HVAC and electrical systems is limited, classroom sizes are limited and there are foundation, roofing, window, masonry and wall issues.
The rising costs to maintain and fix Bath School are also not cost-effective or fiscally responsible. Please also see FAQ about spending wisely/renovation vs. replacement costs.
*Please also see FAQ about spending wisely/renovation vs. replacement costs.

The plan calls for partially renovating both sites with a focus on safety. There are two phases. The first phase, which would be funded by the bond issue, will address health and safety issues along with site needs such as parking lots. The second phase will occur at a later date yet to be determined. A second phase would require additional funding.

There is a new bus garage in the Master Facilities Plan. The Board continues to put money aside to do this project with the express goal of reducing the bond amount and millage to be paid by the community in the future. Some of the money is saved, the remaining costs will come from the bond.

Yes it can, but the Facilities Committee recommended keeping the existing middle school instead. The main rationale was that the middle school has a functional floor plan that can be easily renovated to improve the overall site.

At this time, the district has a “Wetlands Delineation Report,” which identifies the topography of the nearly 40 acres it owns along Everett Road. Based on this report, it appears that there is an opportunity to develop a large portion of the northernmost part of the property, which connects to the Hillcrest property. The next step, which is in process, is for the district’s architect, using the delineation, to determine which wetlands need to be filled and relocated in order to meet our needs. This process will determine what can be potentially built on this property. At a minimum, we are working to determine if we can put practice fields, a softball field and possibly other non­instructional facilities on the northern portion of this land. There is a possibility the district MAY NOT use this land or look for other land, if it is not fiscally responsible. The current site plan concepts we are looking at would displace only the softball field and not impact the baseball field on the high school campus. That could possibly change if the new high school site plan was oriented east/west instead of north/south and then neither field would be displaced.

Proposed site plans of the new school buildings as well as the new athletic fields can be seen here.

The football field, including the entire stadium and turf ­­ will remain intact

The Technology 1:1 Initiative came directly from the district’s Technology Plan and Strategic Plan, which was created by the district’s stakeholders. This is an instruction initiative that is to provide our students with 21st-century​ learning. While the first year of the investment is costly, the district is anticipating cost savings over the life of this initiative in areas of curriculum adoptions and paper costs.

The strategic plan, which was created with the voice of stakeholders at the core, contains many components. New facilities with flexible learning spaces are a portion of the plan. Other components include a focus on technology. The district’s plan is to progress in each area of the plan simultaneously to ensure the needs of our students are being met in all of the identified goal/target areas.

The 1:1 Initiative after the initial year is designed to become sustainable and to not be an addition to the current budget. In other words, costs will begin to shrink in other areas, which enables the district to keep costs flat because of the shifting of expenditures from one area to another. This shift will take place in the area of textbook resources, copy machine costs, paper consumption, the ability to use other, less­ expensive technology resources and the reduction of other technology equipment such as labs.

The district will coordinate with the relevant groups and teams around scheduling of the practice and turf fields during construction time. While there isn’t a formalized plan yet, those conversations will occur well in advance of the practice schedules. For example, in the past, during construction of the turf field, the band practiced on the parking lot. The district has control of the sequence of events of building, so we can stagger projects to minimize the negative
impact on day­to­day operation

Upon passing the bond in November, planning will begin immediately with projects to commence during the summer of 2017. The completion time will be anywhere from three to five years, with the hope of three years. One of the benefits of the current plan is that there will be no students displaced during the renovation process. Additionally, the renovations to the middle school and Hillcrest will be completed over the summer months to avoid disrupting the educational environment.
Once the new Revere High School and Bath Elementary are build, the existing buildings would be demolished and those costs are included in the bond issue.

Bath will be rebuilt north of the existing building. The district owns a total of 11.3 acres, including some wooded land. Some of the wooded area will be used for the new building. There also needs to be significant grading of the site. A new ball field will be built in the northwest corner.

There will be two new, state­ of ­the ­art gymnasiums and locker rooms. Recent purchases of sound equipment will be transferrable to the new structure. The specific details of the plans will happen after successful passage of the bond, with input from the athletic community.

We will have a state ­of­ the­ art, larger auditorium to meet the needs of and expand our extensive theater and musical arts programs.

We passed an operating levy in 2011. The 10 ­year levy generates $4.88 million yearly. The money from that levy goes specifically to operational costs, which includes educating our students, employee costs and technology costs. The funds do not provide the money needed for substantial capital improvements. The bond monies would be dedicated solely to building new facilities and renovating existing facilities. Bond money cannot be used to fund the district’s operations.

Yes, that is true. Even with the successful passage of this bond issue, we will still have one of the lowest school tax rates in the county. Only Nordonia and Norton would have lower school tax rates.

The bond is a 4.1 mill, 30­ year bond that will raise $68.2 million for the purpose of building two new schools and updating the other facilities. Please note that the millage is only an estimate and final millage is not determined until the the bonds are actually sold, at which time the rate on the bonds is determined.

First and foremost, the finance committee thoroughly examined the district’s borrowing capacity in order to determine the appropriate debt/revenue ratio.

We recalled all of the teachers who were laid off.

We are currently examining the projected changes (both positive and negative) in operating costs, with the help of experts in the field due to updated/renovated facilities. There is no dispute the operating costs will change and there may be additional costs (i.e. $134,000 yearly costs in air conditioning for two buildings that will have air conditioning), however the district will be working that into our budget. Additionally, there will be significant savings in not having to repair failing buildings.

Recently, we have also learned that other districts, which have built “energy efficient new buildings” have experienced utility cost savings because the buildings were built with a very tight envelope to contain energy, and the buildings have robust control systems to manage consumption. That is also our hope.

The Board of Education committed in 2011 that the passage of the operating levy at that time would fund the district for 7 to 10 years. Currently, we are projecting operating in the black through 2019 and for the first months of 2020. This necessitates a new operating levy campaign in 2019. This levy will occur regardless of the results of the bond campaign.

No, bond money can only be used for capital improvements.

We made a sizeable investment in new windows and doors in many of the buildings. The architectural firm is aware of these investments and is working on ways to integrate those windows and doors in the new projects as much as possible.

The renovations at RMS and Hillcrest are more related to infrastructure. They include new vestibules to create safer entrances to the buildings, creating common areas, making the buildings handicapped-accessible and improving electrical and plumbing systems, among other things.

Our schools are safe, however to protect our kids in today’s world, we need facilities that continue to keep them safe. We need buildings that allow us to provide additional levels of security that are consistent with other successful school districts. With the successful passage of the bond, we would be able to provide enhanced entrances at each of our buildings, which require visitors to be buzzed into one, secured entrance. The secured entrance would also open into the main office. This prevents visitors from gaining access to the main building without proper clearance.

The district takes its responsibility to use taxpayers’ funds very seriously. We spent a lot of time with our community committees to make sure we were being fiscally responsible for these projects. The rising costs to maintain and fix Bath Elementary and Revere High School are not cost-effective or fiscally responsible.

The Ohio Facilities Construction Commission (OFCC) advises schools against renovation investments when those costs reach or exceed two-thirds of the cost of a new building. Both Bath and Revere High School are very near that figure. The following costs are based on the OFCC’s assessments and confirmed/updated with more detail by our architects, Lesko Architecture.

High School:
Renovation Cost $22,448,411
Replace $35,280,720
Percentage 64%

***While this is beneath the two-thirds or 66%, it is important to know that the building isn’t functioning with its current layout on many levels, including for safety and security.

Bath Elementary:
Renovation Cost $11,779,332
Replace $15,241,095
Percentage 77%

The buildings were and continue to be properly maintained. For example, we are on a roof-maintenance program on a yearly basis that identifies proactive repairs and roof replacement cycles. The buildings are old and foundations begin to shift, brick and mortar begin to deteriorate, even if well maintained due to age. Infrastructure, which is not visible to the general public i.e. plumbing, sewers, heating, and electrical have limitations based on age of technology and in limitations in light of increased usage/demand.

Bath Elementary was built in 1923 with additions in 1952 and 1967. Revere High School was originally built in 1951 and has had six renovations: in 1956, 1963, 1967, 1970, 1982 and 1994.

If the bond issue fails in November, our intention would be to put it unchanged on the ballot in May, because our need is critical.

Ohio law does not require schools to offer full-day kindergarten. The Board of Education continues to evaluate the kindergarten tuition situation. The tuition collected from full day kindergarten allows us to be fiscally responsible by covering our costs. However, we would like to be clear that kindergarten tuition receipts represent half of what it costs us to fund the kindergarten staff. For the 2015-2016 school year (the latest full information available since we are still enrolling some students for this school year), the total cost, including payroll taxes for the kindergarten staff of 8 full-time teachers (7 full-day classrooms and one teacher with two half-days) was $594,453.53. Tuition receipts totaled $338,625. The difference is taken from our general fund. For the 2016-2017 school year, we have six full-day classrooms and one teacher with two half-days. The extra kindergarten teacher is teaching a different grade.

The school district sold the Richfield Elementary building and 10.2 acres in June of 2012. The buyer was LTC Realty IV, LLC. LLC stands for Limited Liability Corporation. The sale price was`$100,000. Estimates for the demolition of the school ranged from $350,000 to $500,000, depending upon the final determination regarding the required degree of abatement needed for hazardous materials. This cost, avoided by the district, was considered by the Board of Education in agreeing to a final sales price. The district does not know the current owners’ plans for the building or land.

The district sold a 57-acre tract of vacant land it owned at Hametown and Everett roads in 2013 for $725,000. It had been purchased in 1997 for a potential high school and bus garage for $735,312. It was sold because it became clear that the development around the site was all residential and it would have been extremely difficult to get approval for a high school or bus garage. Athletic fields were later developed there because of the needs of the schools and the community. The field investment was done at the lowest cost and did not include drainage, lighting, irrigation or any out buildings. The land was appraised shortly before the sale in 2013 for $700,000.

Upon passage of the bond issue, Bath Elementary would expand from a 4th- and 5th-grade building to a 3rd-, 4th-and 5th-grade building.
Third grade will be moving from Hillcrest to Bath. Hillcrest is currently overcrowded and moving 3rd grade will free up nine classrooms. That will provide a much-needed reprieve to the building. Currently, there are teachers sharing classrooms at Hillcrest.

Additionally, our preschool program is currently housed at Bath, and will be moved to Hillcrest. This is a more appropriate placement for our preschool population and it will allow for much-needed collaboration time between the preschool teachers and kindergarten staff. Subsequently, Hillcrest will become a preK to 2nd-grade​ building.

If the bond issue does not pass, these moves will not happen since there is not room at the existing Bath building for nine classrooms of 3rd graders.

As they say in Ohio, if you don’t like weather, wait a day. Temperature fluctuations are vast in the fall and the spring, which reinforces the need and benefit of centralized heating and cooling. Technology investments are vulnerable to extreme temperatures. Studies show the single largest factor that impacts a student’s willingness to learn is student physical comfort level. During the cold season, our heating equipment doesn’t perform uniformly across each building and classroom. There are also OHSA (Occupational Health and Safety Administration) mandates for fresh-air exchanges that we cannot meet with our current HVAC equipment.
With that said, as much as we would like to retrofit Hillcrest and Revere Middle School to have a new HVAC system through the buildings, it is cost-prohibitive to get central air throughout those existing buildings. ($9.9 million) Our district’s Facilities and Finance committees spent a significant amount of time looking at various plans for the district, while remaining fiscally responsible and decided it was not possible to include air conditioning in Hillcrest and RMS. Please see FAQ question specifically about the heat.

There are absolutely no plans for a year-round school year.

Heat continues to be an area of concern in the district during the months of August and early September. The district continually monitors temperatures in the buildings and while we have not closed school for excessive heat to date, the option does exist. The building administrators are working with their staff to make the best of a difficult situation. If any parent,does not wish to send their child to school due to the temperature, as always they can elect to keep their student at home.

The plan calls for A/C in the new buildings: HS and Bath. There are not funds in the bond to provide a complete renovation and addition of a new HVAC system to Hillcrest and the Middle School. The estimated cost of the project would be $9.9 million. The bond cost is $68.2 million dollars, the district’s borrowing capacity is $78 million. The finance, facilities, administration and Board of Education did not believe it was in the best interest of the district to extend our borrowing to our limit in case of an emergency. There has been discussion of a phase II of the project where HVAC would be installed in the other two buildings through use of the district’s Permanent Improvement Fund. However, that plan has not been finalized and would be subject to other unforeseen or emergency expenditures.

Our existing electrical infrastructure would not support the extra load that a school full of window air-conditioning units would add. Electrical upgrades are only slated for Revere Middle School, if the bond issue passes. However, we do not feel at this time that the cost of purchasing window units and the extra electricity costs, if the infrastructure could support it, would be fiscally responsible to accommodate the hot weather.

There are also liability issues if teachers or PTAs purchased window air-conditioning units.

Revere has the oldest high school in the Suburban League American Division (half of the Suburban League and our current division). We also have the oldest renovation/addition.

Revere High School was built in 1951 with additions in ‘56, ‘63,’67, ‘70, ‘82 and ‘94.

Here are dates for other schools in the Suburban league- American division:

  • Highland- 2004
  • Copley- 1970, additions in ‘79 and ‘07
  • Barberton- 2000
  • Aurora- 1997
  • Tallmadge- 2008
  • Kent- 1959 with additions in mid ‘60s, early and late ‘70s and ‘97

Here’s where we stand compared to neighboring schools and cities that families consider when moving into the area:

  • Firestone- 2016
  • Hudson- 1992, renovations in ‘06-’07
  • Brecksville- 1997
  • Wadsworth- 2012
  • Green- 1996, addition in ‘06
  • Norton- new HS under construction
  • Medina- 1973, addition in ‘03
  • Stow- 1987
  • Twinsburg- 1999, addition in‘06
Please see the chart below for the millages and percentages in each of the three communities that encompass our Revere District. Please note that even with the successful passage of this bond issue, we will still have one of the lowest school tax rates in the county. Only Nordonia and Norton would have lower school tax rates.

Millage Millage Millage
Bath Township Village of Richfield Richfield Township
School Effective Millage for Residential Tax Rates
Calendar Year (CY) 2015 Payable in CY 2016
35.49 35.49 35.49
Residential Effective Tax Rates CY 2015 Payable CY 2016 70.41 58.06 68.46
School as a Percentage of the Total 50.4048% 61.1264% 51.8405%

The new buildings will be designed in such a way to maximize use of all the space available. For example, the existing high school, with six independent additions over the years, has “dead” spaces where there is currently no functional use. The new structure will be designed to not include such spaces, therefore lowering the square footage from the existing structure to the new building. The current high school is roughly 170,000 square feet and the new high school would be roughly 150,000 square feet.

Additionally, common areas will be built at the new high school to accommodate growth and the classrooms will be designed as flexible spaces with movable furniture that can be adapted to different student class sizes.

In addition to maximizing the available space, specific square footage needed was determined by the synthesis of numerous data points. One of the determining factors was enrollment projections, which were examined by two entities. Both reaffirmed our projections over the course of the next 10 years, which illustrate the population remaining relatively constant.

Many area schools, Akron Public Schools in particular, have had their construction projects funded heavily by the Ohio Facilities Construction Committee funding. However, the amount of funding is based on total assessed property value in the district, not income, so Revere’s funding portion would be capped at 5% since we are considered a high-wealth district. This would equate to $3.4 million for the district out of a $68.2 million project. And, if the district takes a dime of funding from the state’s program, Revere loses design control over the project to a large extent. When comparing the funding amount available to Revere from the state vs losing local control over the project, the tradeoff is not practical. For example, by taking state funding we would be prevented from reaching our facility goals such as an independent auditorium vs the state’s requirement of a combined cafetorium. We also believe the OFCC regulations could increase our building costs and decrease the amount resources we have available.

Also, even if we wanted the money from the state, there is no guarantee that our district’s turn would come up on the list to receive the funding, based on our ranking.

Additionally, Revere is rated in the 99th percentile in terms of wealth associated around assessed property values, which previously equated to the OFCC supporting our bond Issue at 1% of the cost. Recently, OFCC updated their regulations to offer 5% contributions to all schools falling between 95-100% wealth. In other words, we would be eligible for 5% contributions from state funding.
To see a chart of all 610 districts in the state – and our ranking of 601 out of 610 in terms of wealth.
http://ofcc.ohio.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Resources/Ranking%20Lists/2017/FY2017-Equity-list-by-number

Regarding grants, we applied for and received a facility safety and security grant sponsored by the State of Ohio in the recent past for building entrance security and radios. We went forward with and we were funded for the radio portion and had to let the facility portion expire because the timing of the grant award did not coincide with our construction project. With passage in November, we would re-apply for this grant assuming it matched-up with the timing of our project and again assuming the grant offering is re-cycled again by the State. This grant for both the entrance and radios were each under $10,000.

The high school has 31 roofs, due to the numerous additions/renovations over the building’s vast history.Additionally, according to the district’s roof vendor, Tremco, the cost to repair all 31 of the high school’s roofs to a condition where they would not leak versus replacement would be in excess of $5 million dollars.

The projected life span of new buildings is 40 to 50 years. There are new rules that the state has implemented that now allows districts to look at multiple bids in choosing contractors. Old rules used to hamstring districts to choose the lowest bid, regardless of potential quality of the project. Under these new regulations the district is able to determine the level of quality needed to build to our specific needs, as opposed to being limited to the lowest bidder.

There are pros and cons when comparing property-tax levies and income-tax levies. There are several limitations of an income-tax levy. They include:

  1. Higher up-front issuance costs of the bond issue, which could require more millage
  2. Higher borrowing rates on the bond because of possible fluctuating income tax collections.This has a long term negative impact over 30 years
  3. Income-tax levies are not deductible on federal income taxes, while property taxes are deductible.
  4. A greater adverse impact to our community because of the high adjusted Federal income of our constituents
  5. Our community does not fit the profile under which an income tax provides an advantage to the community. Rural or farming communities, where the majority of the taxpayers have large tracts of real estate and lower income, benefit more from an income-tax levy.

The advantage to an income tax levy is that you can tax only earned income and exclude other forms of income such as retirement income. The disadvantages outweigh the one benefit.

At Bath Elementary, parts of the building are inaccessible to our students who use wheelchairs unless they physically go outside to get to the locations. This requires students to travel outside of the building to get to areas they need to access on a daily basis — including the winter months. In addition, there are several other areas that are only accessible by stairs, which limit scheduling of classes and access to students and staff who have mobility impairments.

At Revere High School, there is limited access to accessible restrooms. There are only two restrooms that are large enough to accommodate large motorized wheelchairs when a support assistant is needed, one of which is a staff restroom. Also, due to multiple levels, ramps and stairs, the only way for students who use wheelchairs for mobility to exit one of our primary classrooms is by winding through a long set of hallways to one exit at the front of the building. This is a serious concern in the event of an emergency in which a rapid evacuation is necessary or when there may be an emergency which blocks access to the halls leading out of the building. In addition, there is one working elevator in the middle of the high school building, but it is often not operating properly, nor is it large enough to accommodate multiple students in wheelchairs.

The Revere district encompasses several communities. There are taxpayers who live in Copley, parts of Akron, the village of Richfield, the township of Richfield, Bath township and even parts of Cuyahoga Falls. The easiest way to know if someone pays taxes to the Revere schools is to have them look up their tax record with the county and it says it below their address. http://fiscaloffice.summitoh.net/

So yes, all of the people who live in those areas are Revere residents who can vote and all of their school tax money goes to the Revere schools.

The Ohio Facilities Construction Committee (OFCC) generated independent enrollment projections for the next10 years illustrating we would have steady enrollment over the lifespan of those projections. Lesko Architecture examined the results and validated that the OFCC report of enrollment did account for potential development of new construction. We will be examining how we can build the structures to accommodate larger-than-anticipated growth by creating spaces that would allow for future additions.

On the ballot, Summit County uses the cost per $100 of assessed tax valuation, not appraised value of a home. The district’s treasurer has done calculations to translate that to the “less than $8 per month per $100,000 of appraised valuation of the home” to make it easier (it’s actually $7.32) for homeowners.

Spread the Word