School Board Votes 3-2 to Approve Inside Millage Transfer;
Considers Earned Income Tax Alternative
Berkshire Board of Education Special Meeting - February 26, 2025
Meeting Details: The meeting was held February 26, 2025 in the Auditorium of the Berkshire Local Schools complex, 14155 Claridon Troy Rd, Burton, Ohio 44021 at 6 pm. A video of the special meeting is posted here. When this report was published on March 10, 2025, the video had been viewed 266 times. View the agenda online and any attached documents here by selecting the meeting tab and then the meeting date. The notation of minutes refers to the time posted on the video for the discussion of the item listed.
Board Members Attendance: President John Manfredi, Vice President Jody Miller, and members Dan Berman, Linda Stone, and Bryan Wadsworth.
Staff Attendance: Superintendent John Stoddard and Treasurer Beth McCaffrey
Meeting called to order at 6:00 pm
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of Agenda - unanimously approved without discussion.
Minutes - None presented for approval.
2:10 min Public Comment/Participation
Mr. Manfredi invited public comment, noting that speakers would be on a 3-minute timer.
Michele Cervenka, Burton
Mrs. Cervenka asked how the district can justify asking for more money. She expressed concern that the money is being used for “someone else’s agenda” and wondered why the school needed the “buildings in the back.” Observer Note: Mrs. Cernenka seemed to be referring to the new Early Childhood Center (ECC). She said she is fine with her tax dollars going to Berkshire students but does not want to pay for children from other districts, such as those in the Jumpstart program. Mrs. Cervenka later asked how many special needs children are in the district. Observer Note: Jumpstart is the former name of an ECC program, described as center-based half-day classes for typical and high-functioning special needs students.
Mr. Manfredi explained that the school needs to replace the funds that the failed PI levy would have provided. He said the PI money is for the buildings, grounds, bus maintenance, and educational support, not wages and benefits. Later in the meeting, Mrs. Miller, Mrs. McCaffrey and Mrs. Stone again stated that the school isn’t asking for new money but is seeking to replace funds the school had been receiving since 1989 through 5-year levy renewals of the PI levy.
Mr. Manfredi said the EEC is for special needs and preschool students and a daycare program. Daycare and preschool children’s families pay for their programs.
Dr. Stoddard added that the students in the facility are Berkshire students. He emphasized that if Berkshire didn’t have the ECC, students would have to be outsourced to places like Metzenbaum. This year, the district has about 215 students with special needs (14% of the total student population). Mrs. McCaffrey and several Board members explained that the ECC was not specifically built for the Jumpstart program. Mrs. McCaffrey said the school knew they were going to have a number of preschoolers with special needs in the future and that it is much more affordable to have these students stay on campus rather than pay to send them off-campus. She noted that Berkshire is currently housing a few children from other schools who are unable to provide service to them. Those school districts pay Berkshire for the service.
Darryl Fleming Kendall, Thompson
Mr. Kendall said he has “one of those annoying children who are taking up space in the special needs department.” He said that the suggestion that “we were going to rob Peter to pay Paul” to provide special needs space is fundamentally disturbing to him.
He noted though he has some frustrations with the school, he commended the Board for being innovative and forward-thinking. He noted that, unlike at his former school, his son is not treated like an outcast. Mr. Kendall said he supports the school but advised against putting a levy on the ballot without strong community outreach, saying that he felt it could create generational animosity toward the school.
Brandon Townsend, Montville
Mr. Townsend said he does not think outreach to the northern part of the district will help pass a levy, noting that parents of school-age children moved away after Ledgemont Schools closed. He said increasing Ledgemont program cuts caused parents to stop supporting the schools, ultimately leading to student flight and the schools’ closing. He sees the same thing happening at Berkshire, saying that the problems at Ledgemont started right after they built a new elementary school. He said five years later there was a lack of support for the general maintenance fund. Mr. Kendall asked the Board to do what it takes to keep the school solvent and avoid making cuts.
Mr. Manfredi pointed out that the bond issue for Berkshire’s new building passed in all the district’s precincts, including Thompson (in the northern part of the district).
Unidentified speaker
He told the Board that they did not campaign well enough on the PI levy renewal. He is against the inside millage transfer, stating future levy passage will be hurt if the community doesn’t get the opportunity to vote.
Mr. Wadsworth asked what would have needed to be said in the last PI campaign.
The speaker didn’t remember receiving mailers or door knocking, which he felt were effective in the past. The speaker was not certain that the Board meetings are the best way to communicate with the community. He suggested the Board consider sending informational pamphlets that included a breakdown of how levy money would be spent.
Mr. Wadsworth said this issue is the toughest thing the Board has had to decide on in all his years and wanted the audience to know they are being heard.
Michele Cervenka, Burton
Mrs. Cervenka commented for a second time, saying she thinks “all the kids are being taken care of” and they are not the issue. She said the issue is “how many more taxes do you want.”
Mr. Manfredi referred again to the defeated PI levy, saying the renewal has been on the ballot every 5 years since 1989 and would not have increased taxes. He said that the Board assumed people understood that the PI levy was for the maintenance and upkeep of the school buildings since they’ve been “doing the same thing since 1989.” He noted that school maintenance must be done whether it’s an old or new building. He said in the last failed levy campaigns, the Board members pooled their own money for multiple newspaper ads and notices on Facebook since the school is prohibited from spending funds for levy campaigns.
Mr. Manfredi said people told him the reason they said no to the levy was they were angry about the property reappraisals. He said residents told him that rejecting the levy was their way of saying “we accepted the reappraisal and that’s your increase. So now we’re not going to pass your PI renewal.” He noted that reappraisals were decided by the State legislature, not the schools. Mr. Manfredi also cited a letter falsely claiming the school got a windfall as a key reason for the levy defeat.
Mr. Manfredi said that news sources are predicting the State intends to cut more funding to public schools, regardless of how they are structured. He noted that Berkshire responded positively to a request by the Governor’s office to increase vocational classes and, as a result, graduates have gotten good jobs. He also pointed to the new AgEd program as vital to students in getting jobs after graduation.
There was an unintelligible comment from Mrs. Cervenka seemingly about the inside millage transfer being a “loophole.” Mr. Manfredi responded that HB920, the State school funding bill, allows school boards to vote to transfer inside millage if needed to fund their schools. A transfer can only be used once a school hits the millage floor and only for permanent improvements. The renewal was voted down, but not because the school didn’t use the money wisely.
Observer Note: The millage floor, or 20 mill floor, refers to the Ohio law that requires school districts to collect a minimum of 20 mills in funding to support public education. Berkshire is currently very near (but not below) the 20 mill floor. The proposed transfer of 2.5 mills from the general fund to the permanent improvement (PI) fund would drop the district below the 20 mill floor because PI money isn’t included in the 20 mill floor calculation formula. As a result, taxes would be increased to bring the district’s funding level back to the required level.
Mr. Manfredi said the State is putting the schools in this predicament, that “it’s not something we asked for. They made us the guilty ones.”
Mr. Wadsworth said this situation “is exactly what the State of Ohio is looking for. They are looking for a divide in small areas like this. They want to separate the school board, they want to make the school the enemy and they want schools to join together. They want county schools. They want to get rid of public education.” He said, “it’s not us against you “and that the Board is “not up here wasting your taxpayer money.” He said he doesn’t want to pay more taxes either, but he also doesn’t want to see the kids who need us the most lose their school. If the school closes, he said Berkshire will no longer be a great community.
Dan Whiting, Burton Trustee
Mr. Whiting confirmed that at last fall’s school board candidate’s night, Mrs. Stone said that some of the levy money would be spent on curriculum development in addition to school improvements.
Mr. Whiting asked if the school was looking at different revenue sources, pointing to the school-owned property across the road from the school complex which was once considered as a site for the new high school. Mr. Manfredi noted that the property had a deed restriction of 50 years which restricts the school’s ability to lease or sell the property until 2043. He said the Treasurer and Board have worked for 8 years on getting out of the deed restriction. He said they’ve tried diligently to break the property up into 2 pieces by selling the wooded area and keeping the cleared area. Mr. Manfredi said the people who signed the restriction are dead and their families refuse to allow the school to lift it.
Mr. Whiting said he will support the school levy. He also noted that Burton Trustees have decided to put off their fire levy this Fall because they can go a couple of more years with their reserves.
Darryl Fleming Kendall, Thompson
Mr. Kendall, commenting a second time, asked when the next time the new levy can go on the ballot?
The Board responded that November is the earliest the levy can go on the ballot.
40:29 min Old Business
Each Board member voiced their thoughts about their vote on the inside millage transfer. All five said this decision is the most difficult one they have faced during their tenure on the Board.
Observer Note: See video for the Board’s complete statements starting at 40:30 minutes.
Mrs. Miller and Mr. Berman both stated they would not be voting to approve an inside millage transfer. Both expressed serious concerns about the community split such an action would create and how it would negatively impact future levy passage. Each member said they preferred to put a levy on the November ballot and work very hard to get it passed.
Mrs. Stone said she would vote for an inside millage transfer because she wasn’t willing to risk losing everything the school had accomplished. She also offered a two-pronged alternative plan. Mrs. Stone proposed an earned income levy on the November ballot, saying that this would not impact low- or fixed-income residents. If the income tax levy passed, the School Board would then vote again to shift the inside millage back to the general fund.
Mr. Wadsworth said he was looking at the revenue choice as a business decision. He noted that an inside millage transfer is guaranteed and would keep the school afloat for a while. He said he likes Mrs. Stone’s idea for an income tax levy, noting the Board can take the transfer off if the levy passes. He said he can’t risk allowing the school to go downhill and so will vote to transfer the millage to “take care of the kids.”
Mr. Manfredi said he was the one who thought the Board should look at an earned income tax instead of doing the inside millage transfer. He said he would vote for the inside millage transfer because he had no choice but to protect the district. Mr. Manfredi said he wants to have the millage in place since “it could go away at any time.” He explained that the earned income tax exists in the district to have working people pay for the school while making retirees and people who can’t afford it exempt. He said it’s a much better way for people in the district to pay for the school, noting that those who aren’t invested in the community, such as renters, are required to fund the schools. Mr. Manfredi said he and the other four Board members would be happy to come and talk to people anywhere at any time about a levy. He acknowledged that they would call on public help unlike last time. Mr. Manfredi said the Board thought they were clear about the effect of the PI levy on voters but admitted they didn’t do a good job of communicating.
After Board member comments, Mr. Wadsworth asked if the Board could pass the millage transfer and then remove it. Mr. Manfredi said yes.
Mr. Manfredi then talked about the school’s frugality, citing examples of cost-saving decisions made during the new school construction. He said the State spent more money with them because the district was operating in a frugal manner.
Mrs. Stone said that some residents worry about how the school spends its money. She then praised Mrs. McCaffrey’s financial acumen, noting that the county Budget Commission, which approves school funding actions, “never question anything that she does” because “we run so fiscally responsibly.” Mrs. Stone said Mrs. McCaffrey has won numerous awards and that the district is “so proud and thankful for her.”
Mr. Manfredi noted that the Budget Commission told Berkshire that they need another revenue stream but would not say what the school should do.
59:45 min Motion to approve a resolution to authorize shifting 2.5 inside mills from the general fund to the permanent improvement fund for tax collection year of 2026. The motion passed 3-2, with Mrs. Miller and Mr. Berman voting no.
Mr. Manfredi offered a second motion for a resolution of the necessity of authorizing an additional .5% earned income tax for the current operating expenses to be placed on the ballot November 4, 2025, ballot.
A Board discussion followed about:
-
How to ensure that the millage transfer will be negated if an earned income tax levy passes.
-
What are the financials on the impact of a .5% earned income tax.
-
Timing of and language for the ballot measure.
The Board then voted on the resolution of the necessity of authorizing an additional .5% earned income tax for the current operating expenses to be placed on the ballot November 4, 2025, ballot. The resolution was defeated unanimously.
Mr. Manfredi said he will ask Mrs. McCaffrey to work with the district’s attorneys to ensure the wording for the .5% earned income tax levy is correct and won’t affect the current 1% income tax collection. The Board will also consider a resolution to rescind the inside millage transfer should the income tax levy pass. The Board will plan to vote on both resolutions at the next regular meeting on March 10.
1:08 Min Meeting Adjourned
Next meeting will be the regular meeting scheduled for March 10, 2025, at 6:00 in the Auditorium of the Berkshire Local Schools complex, 14155 Claridon Troy Rd, Burton, Ohio 44021.
Observer: Rooney Moy
Editor: Anne Ondrey
Reviewer: Sarah McGlone
Date Submitted: March 7, 2025
The League of Women Voters Geauga is a 501(c)(3) nonpartisan political organization that encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and advocacy. They do not support or oppose individual candidates or parties. Learn more about the LWVG at www.lwvgeauga.org.