Tag: tax levy

  • An Open Letter to the Loveland Board of Education from Loveland VOICE

    An Open Letter to the Loveland Board of Education from Loveland VOICE

    VOICE is a grassroots organization representing ALL of Loveland. As our name implies, we are not your enemy, we are citizens concerned for the welfare of all. VOICE did not fail the recent Permanent Tax Levy: the citizens of Loveland failed the Levy 52%-48% for many reasons, some of which were compiled and listed in an article titled Why People Vote No. VOICE’s purpose is to ask questions and inform citizens on the broader facts of an issue or narrative and to hold the district accountable to justifying expenditures of public money. VOICE originated after the 2019 levy when it was apparent that the district was not being truthful about its needs or communicating well with the community. We understand that the district had operated without public scrutiny for many years and that it can be uncomfortable to have the curtain pulled back and receive criticism. Some in our community have even been offended by our efforts. Public education, however, is a service to the community, paid for by taxpayers. Therefore the school is a servant, not the master, and should be able to operate with humility and correction when necessary.

    The School Board has not represented the community. Rather, it has acted merely as an advocate for the school. The Board should intelligently consider the entire Loveland community represented in three different counties and several socio-economic neighborhoods. The Board’s decisions impact the whole community and should not be overwhelmingly influenced by “in-house” thinking. The VOICE and numerous individual citizens suggest that, moving forward, the Board seriously consider alternatives to constantly choosing PERMANENT property taxes. The burden on senior citizens, long-term residents and low-income families is destructive and pushes people deeper into poverty or out of the community. Moreover, the rising property tax burden does not maintain property values more than it simply discourages all but higher income earners from purchasing homes in our community. Pushing an older generation or middle class taxpayers out to make room for young families who will bring more money is not a healthy or unifying way to build a community. The current path is unsustainable, as has been repeated by businessmen and other ordinary citizens since 2020. We do not want to constantly reside in a victim status created by H.B.920, and we need to take the time to consider the alternatives and change the status quo.

    The VOICE has been mocked for its themes of trust and transparency, and yet getting simple answers for simple questions, like what is the true number of teachers and why a lower number was used for a live levy session, has been virtually impossible. To understand real budget numbers, numerous questions must be asked, resulting in accusations that individuals are using up district time and resources. When the contingency fee was explained at a board meeting, it created confusion about where the money came from and how the bucket was to be refilled. The district clearly avoided directly addressing the issue several times when clarification was sought. Citizens must be able to understand how and why their money is being spent in a clear, not obfuscated or cherry-picked, fashion. Please don’t announce that you will have to cut 50 teachers if the levy fails and then, after the levy fails, announce that no decisions have been made about future funding requests or budget cuts. We have good, honest people in our community. Please don’t sell us a levy with fear. Please give us the whole truth so we can be informed and make up our own minds. It is our money, and they are our kids, not yours. Please don’t resist transparency — proactive transparency builds trust. You do not build trust by talking at people. Has the greater community ever been invited to engage in a discussion where the conversation was not directed by the school?

    Please consider curbing expenditures in a time of economic hardship. There are many ways we can think of to trim the budget before cuts are even considered. Before approving the next budget forecast in November please remove from the budget the amounts that were added in anticipation of passing a levy. Strip the budget of money for potential new teachers or possible bus drivers, and put the contingency fee money back into the baseline cash balance. Please justify your expenditures instead of vaguely claiming that you need money to “maintain educational programming”. This purposely leaves it to the public to fill in the blank. If you are putting a levy on the ballot, every dollar you are asking for should be accounted for publicly. Please don’t hold on to our money for us, promising not to spend it until you need to, when we might need that money right now for our families and our own basic living expenses.

    We kept hearing the message that things were changing, but it seems that things continue to be done as they were in the past. This community infighting was created by you, the Board. It pits neighbor against neighbor, friend against friend. It is unnecessary! We all want what is best for the community and what is best for the schools. It took years to get us to this point of “bridge failure”, and it will take time to repair the damage. You alone have been entrusted with the power and responsibility to solve this problem. Make the decisions necessary to fix the budget and reduce the excessive spending that is so obvious to many of us. Pushing this off until another permanent levy finally passes will not fix anything. The fighting will still be there, and the community will pay the price. Take responsibility. The fix is NOT cutting services, it is proper budgeting and spending. It is time to change how we do things because we cannot afford to keep repeating past mistakes. Whether levies pass or fail, we must all return to living together in the same community. We would like to believe our Board has the will and courage to do hard things, to actively listen to dissenters, and to bring unity out of the division we have experienced in Loveland.

    Sincerely,

    Loveland VOICE (Voter Oversight, Interest and Concern for Education)

  • 2020 Loveland area Election results

    2020 Loveland area Election results

    Here are election results as of November 23 as reported by Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren counties. The State-wide and U.S. Congress results are those reported from the Ohio Secretary of State.

    If you notice any errors in this report please EMAIL us so we can make corrections.

    The Voter Turnout in Clermont County was 76.71%

    The Voter Turnout in Hamilton County was 72.44%

    The Voter Turnout in Warren County was 81.8%


    For President

    Clermont County

    Joe Biden 34,092 (30.79%)

    Donald Trump 74,570 (67.36%)

    Hamilton County

    Joe Biden 246,266 (57.15%)

    Donald Trump 177,886 (41.28%)

    Warren County

    Joe Biden 46,069 (33.76%)

    Donald Trump 87,988 (64.49%)

    State-Wide

    Joe Biden 2,603,681 (45.18%)

    Donald Trump 3,074,418 (53.35%) 

    The AP reported National Totals on November 23:

    Joe Biden has 306 Electoral College Votes –  51.1% (79,896,713 total votes)

    Donald Trump has 232 Electoral College Votes 47.2% (total 73,826,657)
    ccc
    270 Electoral College Votes are needed to win
    ccc
    The Associated Press has called this race for Joe Biden · Learn more
    ccc
    On Monday, November 23 the U.S. General Services Administration formally “Ascertained” Biden as the “Apparent Winner” and will move ahead with the Presidential transition proceedings.
    ccc

    FOR REPRESENTATIVE TO CONGRESS (1ST DISTRICT)

    Democrat Kate Schroder

    Hamilton County 130,362 (51.85%)

    Warren County 41,660 (31.11%)

    Total 166,061 (44.55%)

    Republican Steve Chabot

    Hamilton County 112,489 (44.74%)

    Warren County 87,071 (65.01%)

    Total 193,637 (51.95%)

    FOR REPRESENTATIVE TO CONGRESS (2ND DISTRICT)

    Democrat Jaime M. Castle

    Clermont County 29,366 (27.09%) 

    Hamilton County 93,554 (54.11%)

    Total 143,436 (38.90%)

    Republican Brad Wenstrup

    Clermont County 78,985 (72.86%)

    Hamilton County 79,319 (45.88%)

    Total 225,271 (61.09%)


    State Races

    For State Representative (65th District)

    Republican Jean Schmidt 44,435 (65.08%)

    Democrat Alan Darnowsky 23,019 (33.71%)

    FOR STATE SENATOR (8TH DISTRICT)

    Democrat Daniel Brown74,565

    Republican Louis W. Blessing III 112,313

    For State Senator (14th District)

    Republican Terry A. Johnson 75,051

    Democratic Ryan Ottney 31,089

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (27TH DISTRICT)

    Democrat Sara Bitter 33,339

    Republican Tom Brinkman 37,723

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (28TH DISTRICT)

    Democrat Jessica E. Miranda 35,353

    Chris Monzel 33,039

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (29TH DISTRICT)

    Cindy Abrams 43,320

    Unopposed

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (30TH DISTRICT)

    Bill Seitz 42,269

    Tom Roll 16,426

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (31ST DISTRICT)

    Democrat Brigid Kelly 42,180

    Unopposed

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (32ND DISTRICT)

    Democrat Catherine D. Ingram 42,055

    Unopposed

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (33RD DISTRICT)

    Democrat Sedrick Denson 41,500

    Republican Mary Hill 13,901

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (54th DISTRICT)

    Morgan Showen 22,261 (38.04%)

    Paul Zeltwanger 36,261 (61.96%)

    FOR STATE REPRESENTATIVE (62nd House)

    Scott Lipps 54,802 (74.66%)

    Erin Rosiello 18,596 (25.34%)

    For State Representative (66th District)

    Adam C. Bird 30,976 (93.26%)


    State Supreme Court

    FOR JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-1-2021)

    John P. O’Donnell 2,177,003

    Sharon L. Kennedy 2,667,548

    FOR JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-2-2021)

    Jennifer Brunner 2,624,224

    Judi French 2,125,979


    Hamilton County

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-1-2021)

    Heidi Rosales 179,070

    Melba Marsh 191,834

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS (1ST DISTRICT)

    Ginger Bock 204,998

    Russell J. Mock 160,641

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (JUVENILE DIVISION) (FULL TERM COMMENCING 2-14-2021)

    Kari L. Bloom 206,415

    John M. Williams 159,635

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-2-2021)

    Christian A. Jenkins 189,920

    Pat Dinkelacker 182,333

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-4-2021)

    Chris Wagner 208,339

    Curt C. Hartman 153,252

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 2-9-2021)

    Democrat Jennifer Branch 202,64

    Elizabeth Callan 159,525

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 2-10-2021)

    Alan C. Triggs 198,81

    Stacey DeGraffenreid 163,225

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 2-11-2021)

    Democrat Thomas O. Beridon 179,567

    Robert A. Goering 189,896

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 2-12-2021)

    Wende Cross 202,503

    Ethna Marie Cooper 159,182

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (FULL TERM COMMENCING 2-13-2021)

    Alison Hatheway 213,554

    Charles J. Kubicki, Jr. 150,233

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (DRUG COURT DIVISION) (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-3-2021)

    Nicole Sanders 207,310

    Kim Wilson Burke 153,529

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (PROBATE DIVISION) (FULL TERM COMMENCING 2-9-2021)

    Pavan Parikh 177,677

    Ralph Winkler 201,245

    FOR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (DOMESTIC RELATIONS) (FULL TERM COMMENCING 7-1-2021)

    Anne B. Flottman 177,888

    Amy Searcy189,943

    FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONER (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-2-2021)

    Democrat Alicia Reece 212,638

    Republican Andy Black 187,263

    Herman J. Najoli18,843

    FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONER (FULL TERM COMMENCING 1-3-2021)

    Democrat Denise Driehaus 241,806

    Republican Matthew Paul O’Neill 174,088

    FOR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY

    Democrat Fanon A. Rucker 200,738

    Republican Joseph T. Deters 221,298

    FOR CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

    Democrat Aftab Pureval 237,825

    Republican Alex Glandorf 177,524

    FOR SHERIFF

    Democrat Charmaine McGuffey 218,878

    Republican Bruce Hoffbauer 198,454

    FOR COUNTY RECORDER

    Democrat Scott Crowley 216,427

    Republican Norbert A. Nadel 193,632

    FOR COUNTY TREASURER

    Democrat Jill Schiller 208,705

    Republican Charlie Winburn 201,650

    FOR ENGINEER

    Republican Eric Beck260,343

    Unopposed

    FOR CORONER

    Democrat Lakshmi Kode Sammarco 312,990

    Unopposed


    Clermont County

    For County Commissioner (Full term commencing 1-2-2021) (Vote for not more than 1)

    Republican Bonnie Batchler 75,570

    Democratic Jeff Richards 30,418

    For County Commissioner (Full term commencing 1-3-2021)

    David L. Painter Republican 83,912

    Unopposed

    For Prosecuting Attorney

    Mark J. Tekulve Republican 85,106

    Unopposed

    For Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas

    Acacia Uible Democrat 28,405

    Barbara Wiedenbein Republican 76,835

    For Sheriff

    Robert S. Leahy Republican 86,975

    Unopposed

    For County Recorder

    Deborah Clepper Republican 85,067

    Unopposed

    For County Treasurer

    Jeannie M. Zurmehly Republican 85,710

    Unopposed

    For County Engineer

    Jeremy Evans Republican 85,206

    Unopposed

    For Coroner

    Brian Treon Republican 85,431

    Unopposed

    For Member of the State Board of Education (10th District)

    Mary E. Binegar 38,804

    Brendan P. Shea 49,569

    For Judge of the Court of Appeals (12th District) (Full term commencing 1-1-2021)

    Matthew Byrne 76,347

    Unopposed

    For Judge of the Court of Appeals (12th District) (Full term commencing 2-9-2021)

    Robert A. Hendrickson 76,325

    Unopposed

    For Judge of the Court of Common Pleas (Probate/Juvenile Division) (Full term commencing 2-9-2021)

    James A. Shriver 80,189

    Unopposed

    Proposed Tax Levy (Renewal) Clermont County

    A renewal of a tax for the benefit of Clermont County for the purpose of the support of children services and the care and placement of children at a rate not exceeding 0.8 mill for each one dollar of valuation, which amounts to $0.08 for each one hundred dollars of valuation, for 5 years, commencing in 2021, first due in calendar year 2022.

    For the Tax Levy 74,985

    Against the Tax Levy 31,940

    Proposed Tax Levy (Renewal) Clermont County

    A renewal of a tax for the benefit of Clermont County for the purpose of the operation of community addiction services providers and community mental health services providers and the acquisition, construction, renovation, financing, maintenance, and operation of alcohol and drug addiction facilities and mental health facilities at a rate not exceeding 0.75 mill for each one dollar of valuation, which amounts to $0.075 for each one hundred dollars of valuation, for 5 years, commencing in 2021, first due in calendar year 2022.

    For the Tax Levy 70,089

    Against the Tax Levy 36,332

    Proposed Tax Levy (Renewal) Clermont County

    A renewal of a tax for the benefit of Clermont County for the purpose of providing or maintaining senior citizens services or facilities at a rate not exceeding 1.3 mills for each one dollar of valuation, which amounts to $0.13 for each one hundred dollars of valuation, for 5 years, commencing in 2021, first due in calendar year 2022.

    For the Tax Levy 77,585

    Against the Tax Levy 29,288


    Warren County

    County Commissioner 1-2-21

    Bob Stein 38,458 (29.64%)

    David G. Young 91,286 (70.36%)

    County Commissioner 1-3-21

    Shannon Jones 97,000 (100%)

    Unopposed

    Prosecutor Attorney

    David P. Fornshell 98,161 (100%)

    Unopposed

    Court of Common Pleas

    James L. Spaeth 97,945 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    Sheriff

    Larry Lee Sims 98,248 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    County Recorder

    Linda Oda 96,925 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    County Treasurer

    Barney Wright 96,985 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    County Engineer

    Neil Tunison 97,242 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    Coroner

    Russell Uptegrove 96,839 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    Judge of Court of Appeals (12th District) 1-1-2021

    Matthew Byrne 87,992 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    Judge of Court of Appeals (12th District) 2-9-2021

    Robert A. Hendrickson 86,131 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    Judge of the Court of Common Pleas (General Division)

    Robert Peeler 87,945 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    Judge of the Court of Common Pleas (Probate and Juvenile)

    Joseph Kirby 89,762 (100.00%)

    Unopposed

    Little Miami LSD Tax Levy Renewal

    For the Tax Levy 11,255 (52.95%)

    Against the Tax Levy 10,002 (47.05%)



  • Gathering the facts to make an informed decision

    Gathering the facts to make an informed decision

    by Dr. Amy Crouse

    As the superintendent of the Loveland City School District, it is my responsibility to ensure that every child in our district has access to quality education while managing our tax dollars wisely and providing a good value to residents. I take this responsibility seriously.

    Dr. Amy Crouse is Superintendent, Loveland City School District

    Another responsibility I take very seriously is the dissemination of facts. This is why we have been hosting community chats and forums, such as the event held on September 12; it’s why we are constantly updating our website and addressing frequently asked questions; and it’s why we are so intent on engaging with our community. It is imperative that our residents have the facts in order to make an informed decision at the ballot on November 5. And some of what we’re seeing out there, well, it’s simply not accurate.

    What is accurate is that Loveland City Schools have reached a critical juncture: We have overcrowding, with some classes being held in hallways and in trailers, we have three old buildings for which repair costs have reached the threshold where industry standards recommend replacement over renovation, and we have a need to secure additional operating dollars. The needs facing our schools are very real and immediate.

    Over these last several years, we have spent time working with the community on a plan that is cost-efficient and meets the school district’s needs. This is the ballot issue facing voters with the Tuesday, November 5 election.

    We realize that this ballot issue is no small ask. We also realize, like the community members who helped identify and prioritize the needs, that it is more cost effective to do the work all at once and that the longer we wait, the more expensive it will be to remedy the needs facing our schools.

    Large amounts of money would have to be spent on other temporary solutions, like trailers, instead of putting the dollars toward real solutions for the long term.

    When considering this ballot issue, it is important to note that there is no zero-cost option with our facilities and the needs do not go away over time if we continue with the status quo. In fact, continuing to do so with our facilities comes at a substantial cost – we would need to divert funds from the classroom to pay for critical repairs, which are still only temporary fixes to problems that don’t go away. We would need to put off important safety and security updates in the buildings and continue to make do with antiquated science and technology laboratories and learning spaces. Large amounts of money would have to be spent on other temporary solutions, like trailers, instead of putting the dollars toward real solutions for the long term.

    I encourage you to visit the “Frequently Asked Questions” section on our website.

    These are important considerations for our community – it comes down to how we want our schools to operate. So that you can be informed about the facts regarding the district work, planning and needs, I encourage you to visit the “Frequently Asked Questions” section on our website. Among other facts on this page, we have also included the updated cost information that shows the board’s intent to structure the financing so that the overall impact of the tax is phased in for residents over three years. This helps residents and it helps meet the school district’s needs.

    In service to our Tigers.



  • When does a dream become a nightmare!

    When does a dream become a nightmare!

    by James Visconti

    In the past 4 years our school board has been working on a plan to cover an anticipated increase in the student enrollment and the replacement of older schools with a super campus; that is second to none. This is the dream. Then the nightmare began trying to figure out how to pay for this this campus and justify nonexistent increases in student enrollment.

    THE PLAN TO PAY FOR IT

    After countless meetings and input from many different sources a decision was made to place a tax levy totaling 16.78 mils on the November ballot.

    James Visconti is a resident of Pheasantwoods in the City of Loveland

    Unfortunately, most Loveland residents were unaware of this process and the impact to their taxes until the ballot information came out. What it means to most property owners is an increase of $588 per $100,000 dollars of your homes appraised value, not the assessed value. Yes, the school board did vote and passed a resolution to alter the first two years of the collection but from the third-year forward is the full amount. This is an addition to the 45 mils already on the books for schools and does not preclude the school board from placing additional levies on the ballot in future years.  

    THE NUMBERS

    The initial numbers used by the school board to forecast the increase in enrollment was 20% over the next five years. When in fact it by their own admission it is more likely to be 5% over the next five years. Without this increase, one of the reasons for the new schools is gone. It should be noted that enrollment for the last 15 years has been relatively flat. Since, 2008 has been dropping including the last year despite all of the local development. Enrollment of 4,837 in 2008. Per the Ohio School report card 4,428 in 2019.

    The next number of concern is the age of the Loveland Primary School which houses grades 1-4. Built in 1941 the school has had several remodels over the years but will eventually need to be replaced but when and at what cost? 

    Why does the school district use 3 classrooms at Loveland Early Childhood Center (LECC) for half day preschool classes when none are required by law? 

    Why does the school district use 3 classrooms at LECC for full-day kindergarten classes when none are required by law? 

    OUR RIGHTS

    We have the right to expect our elected officials to act in the best interest of those being asked to foot the bill!

    We have the right to ask any and all questions and have them answered without first putting them in writing in an open board meeting!

    We have the right to expect our tax dollars to be spent to educate our children not to build a super campus. 

    We have the right not to be taxed out of our homes! 

    We have the right to VOTE NO on November 5

    I for one am going to exercise that right!



  • How to entice a Loveland property tax payer, by cooking a lobster

    How to entice a Loveland property tax payer, by cooking a lobster

    by Walter D. Golladay

    Walter Golladay is a resident of Loveland

    Thursday evening, the 12th, our Loveland School Superintendent and Treasurer hosted a “…community meeting about Loveland Schools’ November 5 ballot issue. The meeting will include a presentation and the opportunity for the audience to ask questions.”

    During the meeting, a resident asked the following question: “How much more in property taxes will I have to pay if the 2019 tax levy is passed?” Our school treasurer responded with a lengthy meandering non-answer.

    The short answer is, visit your respective county auditor at:

    Hamilton County: https://wedge.hcauditor.org/

    Clermont County: https://www.clermontauditor.org/_DNN/

    Warren County: https://www.wcauditor.org/

    On each county website, search for your specific property. The quickest way is to search by the property owner. Enter your name, and accurate property information will appear.

    On your respective homeowner’s page, your 2018 property taxes will show what you paid. On your respective individual 2019 upcoming tax levy page, it will show what you will pay if the school district property tax levy is passed. One-half of the upcoming taxes will be due January 2020!

    Earlier this week, the “Loveland School Board authorizes a phase-in bond portion of levy over three years if Nov. 5 issue passes.” In so doing, Loveland property owners would benefit from a 3 year phase-in of the bond portion of the levy resulting in lower property tax levies of $20 per month for each $100,000 in the tax year 2019, and $35 per month in the tax year 2020, and the full levy charge of $49 per month would take effect in the tax year 2021.

    If the newly proposed school district tax levy 2-year diet is accepted by the Hamilton County Auditor, then for tax year 2019, a first-year diet of $20 per month translates into an additional $240 per annum; for the tax year 2020, the second year diet of $35 per month translates into $420 per annum; and in the tax year 2021 your diet terminates with $49 per month for $588 per annum, continuing indefinitely.

    As of yesterday, “Friday the 13th”, all 3 county websites report property taxes due and payable in the tax year 2019, of the full – no-diet – $588 per annum.

    The school district 2-year diet reminds me of the old parable: throw a lobster in boiling hot water to cook, it will jump out; throw a lobster in cold water, then add heat, it will happily swim around until its cooked. Which lobster are you?