School board discusses referendum misconceptions

Clay County School Board members said they would have preferred more precise language on the Nov. 8 ballot referendum that continues a one-mill property tax assessment for school security and other school district expenses.

Although the word “continue” is included in the ballot measure’s title, board members said some voters might incorrectly assume the referendum authorizes a new tax, not continuing one that has been in force since 2019.

The referendum is worded: “Shall an additional one (1) mill of ad valorem millage tax, proportionally shared between charter and non-charter Clay district public schools based upon each charter school’s proportionate share of the district’s total unweighted full-time equivalent student enrollment, be approved to fund safety and security for district public school students and staff, and to provide operating expenses of the district, beginning July 1, 2023, and ending on June 30, 2027?”

School Board Chair Mary Bolla said during an Oct. 25 workshop that she wished the word “continue” had been included in the body of the ballot question and not only in the title.

Board member Janice Kerekes said the referendum’s language was constrained by state law.

Bolla added that some voters are also misinformed about what would happen if the referendum failed, saying that some voters think the sheriff’s office would step in and provide school resource officers free of charge.

“We would have to absorb those costs, and I don’t know that people understand that,” Bolla said. “It’s not: oh then, the

sheriff’s office is going to pick it up. No, we as a school district will be paying for that, so this continuation of the one mill is absolutely critical to the operation and the budget that we have.”

“You’re right,” added Kerekes. “I don’t think people realize that we don’t get any funding from the sheriff’s Office and if we were to contract with them like we did years ago, the school district still pays for that. I guess the only way to really show that it would come out of our budget is to show what programs would have to be cut in order to absorb it. Something has to give.”