By any reasonable measure, public education should be a cornerstone of a functioning democracy. But in Ohio—particularly in Summit and Portage counties—we’re leaning on an outdated and inequitable funding model that places a disproportionate burden on local taxpayers. It’s time we talk honestly about the unsustainable cycle of levies, and the urgent need for reform.
The Levy Treadmill: A Flawed and Exhausting Cycle
Ohio’s public schools are primarily funded through a mix of state allocations and local property taxes. In theory, this allows communities to support their schools directly. In reality, it creates an environment where districts are perpetually campaigning for their survival.
Every few years—sometimes less—districts return to voters with another plea: Please approve a new levy. These aren’t mere budget boosts; they are lifelines. And increasingly, they are lifelines that come with diminishing returns. Even “continuing levies”—those sold as long-term solutions—often fail to keep schools financially solvent for more than a few years.
This cycle is broken. And more importantly, it’s unjust.
A System Already Declared Unconstitutional
It’s not just impractical—it’s illegal. Or rather, it should be. In 1997, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in DeRolph v. State that the state’s method of funding schools, which relies heavily on local property taxes, was unconstitutional. The court found that this system created “gross disparities” between rich and poor districts, violating the Ohio Constitution’s requirement for a “thorough and efficient” system of public education.
That was nearly three decades ago.
And yet, here we are—still using the same broken framework, still forcing local communities to fill funding gaps with property taxes, and still failing to fix the structural issues the court identified.
Ohio has not only ignored the ruling—it has normalized the unconstitutional.
Who Bears the Weight?
While levies are marketed as community investments in children’s futures, we must be honest about who’s footing the bill. The current system disproportionately affects:
- Senior citizens living on fixed incomes who face rising property taxes with no corresponding increase in income.
- Low-income families already stretched thin by inflation and housing costs.
- Underserved communities that often lack the voting power or political representation to resist the financial strain.
It’s not that these groups don’t care about education—they do. But care does not equate to capacity. The model assumes a universal ability to give more, over and over again. That assumption is not only flawed; it’s harmful.
The Myth of Permanence
Continuing levies are often touted as a way to bring “financial stability” to districts. But the truth is more sobering. In many Summit and Portage county school districts, continuing levies haven’t solved long-term budget challenges—they’ve merely postponed them. Costs outpace revenue. Needs grow. And districts are still left trying to do more with less.
A levy, continuing or otherwise, is not a strategic plan. It’s a stopgap.
Time for Innovation
We have to ask a hard but necessary question: What would it look like for districts to manage within their allocated budgets—without relying on endless tax hikes?
This isn’t a call to gut education funding. It’s a call to modernize how we think about resource management and fiscal responsibility in schools. Options include:
- Regional collaboration to share services, reduce overhead, and increase purchasing power.
- Technology integration that streamlines administrative costs and improves efficiency.
- Zero-based budgeting that forces districts to justify each dollar, not just incrementally adjust last year’s numbers.
- Advocacy at the state level for a funding formula that actually reflects the needs of Ohio’s diverse districts—and finally complies with the Constitution.
We need school boards and superintendents to lead with creativity and courage, not just with levy schedules and ballot language.
A Different Kind of Responsibility
Supporting public education is a shared responsibility. But right now, that responsibility is falling unevenly across communities—and doing so in a way that threatens public trust. If we want people to keep showing up at the polls with a “yes” vote, we need to give them a system that respects their sacrifice and doesn’t keep coming back for more.
Ohio’s children deserve better. So do its taxpayers.
Let’s move beyond the levy treadmill and toward a funding model—and a mindset—that prioritizes sustainability, fairness, and long-term vision. It’s not just possible. It’s necessary. And it’s long overdue.