Perrysburg school board reviews options to replace property tax with school income tax; asks for demographic and levy‑outcome data

School district staff presented the mechanics, tradeoffs and revenue estimates of a school income tax at a Perrysburg Exempted Village School Board work session, and board members asked for further demographic and levy‑outcome data before taking any formal steps.

The presenter said only one school income‑tax type can be in place at a time and that rates must be set in quarter‑percent increments. “When you put a new income tax in it takes approximately 18 months to get full collection,” the presenter said, explaining that withholding starts quickly but nonwithholding payments tied to annual tax returns delay steady receipts until after the next filing season.

Why it matters: converting from property‑tax reliance to an income tax would shift the composition of who pays for schools. The presenter showed example equivalencies (for example, a half‑percent traditional income tax was presented as roughly equivalent to several mills of property tax) and estimated that replacing roughly $48 million of property‑tax revenue would require several percentage points of income‑tax rate depending on whether the district used a traditional (narrow, wages‑focused) base or an earned‑income base.

Board members pressed on distributional effects. Miss Phillips and other members asked how retirees, households with low earned income and renters would be affected; members noted that homestead exemptions are administered at the county level and that qualifying thresholds matter for impact calculations. One member asked specifically about the homestead income threshold referenced in the presentation (about $41,000) and requested clearer counts of how many district residents would qualify for exemptions.

Members also discussed mitigation options. The board talked about zoning and economic‑development efforts to attract commercial and industrial taxpayers, and noted that certain revenue — such as public‑utility personal property taxes (cited in the presentation at about $2 million) — would not transfer to an income tax and therefore factor into any replacement calculation. The group discussed the role of tax abatements and school compensation agreements and flagged a desire for greater transparency on negotiated values and the impact of abatements.

What the board asked staff to do: collect recent, local Department of Taxation data tailored to Perrysburg (not statewide aggregates), assemble demographic breakdowns of wage earners versus retirees, report on recent income‑tax levy outcomes in comparable communities, and produce a clear timeline showing how conversion and potential ballot steps would align with expiring levies. Members also requested plans for community engagement so residents can weigh in before the board moves forward.

Next steps: staff agreed to return with the requested data, timelines and public‑engagement materials. No vote or formal commitment to place a levy on a ballot was taken at this meeting.