The future of Ohio High School

E-mail this story

Print this story

Share

OHIO — More than 150 Ohio residents turned out Thursday night to hear some facts about the possibility of closing Ohio High School.

Ohio’s Committee of 10, a community group that would like to see the high school annex into the Princeton High School District, called the community meeting, which was held at the Ohio fire station.

The meeting began with a panel of various experts answering a series of questions on issues regarding the high school.

First to speak was Michelle Heninger from the Illinois State Board of Education. Heninger explained the difference between annexation, in which the Ohio district would cease to exist, and deactivation, in which the district would continue to exist, but students would be tuitioned out to one or more other high schools.

Heninger also discussed the issue of long-term debt. She said any debt remains the responsibility of the taxpayers who were in the district when the debt was assumed, and not the responsibility of the other district.

Bureau County Clerk Kami Hieronymus discussed how a district’s Equalized Assessed Valuation was combined with the district’s tax levy to determine tax rate. The Big Sky wind farm project is proposed to double the EAV in the two Ohio districts. Hieronymus said the districts could lower the existing tax rate and still bring in more money.

Hieronymus also discussed the village of Ohio’s Tax Increment Financing District. She said most residents in the village are in the TIF district, and the funds generated remain in the district, where they are spent at the village board’s discretion.

Hieronymus said there could be more than one question on the ballot regarding the high school, such as one about annexation with PHS and another about deactivation, but both questions could not be binding.

Supervisor of Assessments Tom Sweeney said the most interesting question he had been asked was about reassessment. Sweeney said assessments are reviewed every four years, and annexing into PHS would have no impact on whether Ohio assessments were reviewed.

PHS Superintendent Kirk Haring said that despite the larger class size, his district has plenty of one-on-one student/teacher time available, and the district offered multiple opportunities for both academic and vocational growth.

Ohio Superintendent Sharon Flesher clarified some issues from the Future of Ohio High School committee report. She said the district had paid off its working cash bonds on Nov. 20, 2007, and that the proposed estimate of $583,000 for additional funds the grade school would need if the high school closed was only an estimate.

Flesher also talked about the wind farm. She said current plans call for a completion date in 12 to 13 months, and then tax dollars would follow one year later.

Ohio Grade School Board member Cindy Hacker said closing the high school would affect the grade school in a number of ways, including shared staff, building costs and transportation issued. Deactivation would have less of an impact, as the high school district could continue to help with transportation and building costs.

“We’re just concerned about how long we’d be able to run the grade school,” Hacker said.

After the prepared questions were answered, Conner opened the floor to questions from the audience. One resident asked when her tax bill would go down if Ohio annexed into Princeton, and was told the new rate would show up the following year. Bart Piper asked if PHS could refinance its debt, making Ohio residents responsible, and was also told yes.

There was more discussion about the TIF. Sweeney said the TIF would continue to exist after annexation, and PHS would levy against the existing tax base. He also said the village would receive less money from the TIF because of the lower tax rate.

Grade School Board member Doug Phalen said the TIF would end in 2015. It could be extended for another 12 years, but the village would have to negotiate with all the taxing bodies, including PHS.

There were many questions for Haring. Kay Wentworth Shields asked about enrollment, and Haring said there had been more than 800 students, and now enrollment was down to about 659. He added enrollment was projected to continue to decline, and that there would be plenty of room for Ohio’s 40 students.

In response to another question, Haring said PHS would welcome Ohio students because the district had concerns about the state and funding.

“More students make it easier to continue to provide the same kind of education we are now,” he said.

Some residents were critical of PHS, pointing out PHS failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress on its most recent report card, and questioning some recent student suicides.

“What does your school have that ours doesn’t?” one woman asked.

Other audience members had questions for the Committee of 10, but moderator Kat Conner and other committee members declined to answer, saying the meeting was for asking questions of the panel.

Before the meeting was concluded, a woman asked Heninger about the timetable for putting the question on the ballot. After explaining the lengthy process, Heninger said she agreed with Regional Superintendent of Schools Bruce Dennison that the issue could not come before voters before the November 2010 election.

Comment on this story at www.bcrnews.com.