School districts seek continuing or new levies. Smaller communities need to raise taxes for public safety. Momma needs a new pair of shoes.
Now, exasperated voters who once supported any request scrutinize these appeals with suspicion. Just look at the statewide results. Last November, more than half of the levy requests in Ohio failed, a dramatic increase from 2023, when just 30 percent were defeated.
Locally, the story was the same. Voters said no to levies for school districts, including Beavercreek, Mad River, and New Lebanon. Small townships, like German and Jefferson, also saw requests denied.
Voters understand that the latest technology costs more, fire and police equipment need to be replaced, and it’s often more cost-effective to replace an old, outdated building with a new one.
But voters now recoil when officials say, “We need this levy.”
Citizens now demand to know “Why” and want specifics.
Elon Musk’s DOGE initiative has been a cluster, save for one very good thing — it’s focused attention on wasteful and unnecessary spending. That much-needed scrutiny has trickled down through society.
For example, Ohio’s Republican lawmakers have formed a DOGE caucus determined to root out inefficiencies in government spending without resorting to Musk’s heavy-handed, slash-and-burn tactics. (Democrats would be wise to get a seat at the table.)
The efficiency focus has trickled down to voters who wonder, “Is this tax increase really necessary?”
The answer may be yes, but administrators have historically provided woefully inadequate answers. With a heightened focus on accountability, school districts and municipalities must take a different approach and present their arguments not from a place of need or want, but efficiency.
School districts often tell their community that if a levy doesn’t pass, they’ll have to cut certain services. Too many voters now see this as an idle threat and shrug their shoulders, as if to say, “Fine. Go right ahead.”
Noting that a district might have to eliminate school clubs and activities, or that extracurricular activity fees might have to increase, is no longer enough to convince taxpayers to dig deeper into their wallets.
In a DOGE era in which eggs exceed $7 a dozen, someone else paying more or doing without only elicits indifference.
Anyone who asks for money needs to explain why they need the support. But they also need to go a step further, and show — not tell — why losing certain services will, overall, have a negative effect on the entire community, not just one aspect of it.
It’s no longer good enough to present fancy charts or PowerPoints at meetings that show levy support leads to increased property values. Well, property values in Montgomery County increased an average of 34% in 2023, so will paying more taxes help a homeowner that much?
If a district says it’s going to cut back on athletics, why is that detrimental to a community that likely has recreation centers and sports leagues young people can join outside of school?
Instead, if a community needs equipment, show the impact of not upgrading. A city could note that newer ambulances have devices that transmit vitals directly to the hospital, saving time and possibly the life of someone in distress.
Administrators need a (really good) rationale before asking voters to spend hard-earned money they could use in other areas of their lives.
The same explanations and warnings don’t hold as much weight as they used to. Administrators need to adjust their strategies if they’re to convince voters to pass the tax increases they say they need.
They need to adjust because voters are tired of being asked for money.
Really tired.
Ray Marcano’s column appears on these pages each week. He can be reached at raymarcanoddn@gmail.com.
About the Author