Bowling Green may be on the ballot in November asking for support for a new high school.

The board of education met for 3 1/2 hours Saturday to learn how much it would cost if the district funded the project with a property tax or combination of property and income taxes.

“You’re approaching the point where you will have to decide how to finance those facilities,” said David Conley, the district’s financial adviser.

Fanning Howey, hired as architects for the new facility, gave an estimate of $48.2 million to $58 million to build a new high school.

Conley initially used $58 million to determine the cost to taxpayers, but also used $65 million to give the district a cushion should interest rates and construction costs go up.

He said it is much easier to not spend the full amount than to over-budget and not have the money.

“You will only be charged for what you use,” said board member Ginny Stewart.

Conley explained the ballot issue will have the amount of money requested, the duration of the taxes, the purpose of the request, and the estimated tax rate.

The facilities advisory committee is meeting April 6 to compile everything in preparation for making a recommendation to the school board at its April meeting. At a public forum earlier this month, the committee recommended the district concentrate on building a new high school.

Thirty percent of Bowling Green’s tax base is business, so with a property tax bond, 30% will be paid by those businesses, Conley said.

Use of an income tax shifts collection from businesses to residents.

“From a financial perspective, the least expensive way for your community to do this is with a property tax,” Conley said.

But for a balanced portfolio, it may make sense to also use an income tax although it will increase everyone’s cost, he said.

“The last time, we were so close because we did 50/50,” said board member Tracy Hovest.

In November 2019, the district’s third request for funds to build a consolidated elementary lost by 71 votes. That issue would have raised $40 million, half with a 1.6-mill property tax and half with a 0.25% traditional income tax.

“You have to make that decision between one or the other or both,” Conley said about how to configure the tax request.

“I don’t believe it’s in the best interest of your taxpayers to delay this project,” he said.

All his calculations were based on a 3.5% interest rate, a 30-year property tax and a 15-year income tax. He also used a $66,215 median income and a $161,300 median home value.

When the campaign for the project begins, $100,000 likely will be used to determine property taxes but he uses the median amount, Conley said.

The median means half the population is above the amount and half is below, he said.

Funding options include:

• $58 million collected by property taxes only: 3.45 mills that will cost $16.15 per month for the median homeowner.

• $58 million, collected 50% by property tax and 50% by income tax: 1.72 mills, 0.25% income tax, costing $21.87 a month for residents with the median income and home value.

In comparison, the bond request in 2019 took 1.60 mills to raise $20 million.

This option will generate $285,000 a year for maintenance of the facility.

• $58 million, 70% collected by property tax and 30% by income tax: 2.4 mills and 0.25% income tax, costing $25.10 monthly.

This would create $350,000 annually to maintain the building.

“It’s appealing to the taxpayers to know we have this plan in place,” Hovest said about having the funds to pay for the maintenance of the building.

The idea was raised to ask for more to cover cost overruns either with construction or interest rates.

Those options included:

• $65 million, paid 70% by property tax and 30% with income tax: 2.69 mills and 0.25% income tax would cost $26.47 each month.

• $65 million, paid 75% property tax and 25% income tax: 3.3 mills and 0.25% income tax would cost $29.31 a month.

• $67.50 million paid with property taxes only: 3.98 mills and $18.73 per month.

In comparison, the $72 million May 2018 ballot request for high school renovations and a consolidated elementary was 5.7 mills.

Stewart asked if it makes sense, knowing that interest rates are going up, to add funds for the future elementary project to the bond request for the high school.

Conley said the district can borrow the money and lock in the interest rates but not collect taxes until the elementary project is started.

Conley said that option would protect taxpayers from higher interest rates.

“This is the least expensive to do everything,” Conley said.

Funding options for this idea included:

• $100 million project split 50/50 between property and income taxes: 2.96 mills and 0.25% income tax would cost $41.51 a month.

• $100 million all property tax: 5.92 mills and $27.85 per month.

Treasurer Cathy Schuller pointed out the $65 million 70/30 split option is only $1.38 less per month than the $100 million option paid for entirely with a property tax.

“It’s something to look at,” Stewart said. “It’s just going to get more and more expensive.”

The concern was raised of asking voters to support an elementary project without knowing what that project is.

Hovest pointed out the facilities advisory committee is equally split between one and two elementaries.

“It’s divisive but it’s lost three times and to me that says volumes,” Stewart said about the lack of voter support for one consolidated elementary.

She said she had heard from the community people who are thrilled with the high school plan and people who are disappointed nothing is being done with the elementaries.

“This could satisfy both entities if we explain it properly,” Stewart said about adding the funds for the elementaries to the high school ballot issue.

“What you’re saying makes perfect sense … I’m just afraid of the number,” said board member Ryan Myers.

Board member Norm Greer said it will be a hard sell to the taxpayers if there is no elementary plan in place.

“Why do we have to defend so hard to do right by these kids?” Hovest asked.

“The question is how much we’re willing to kick the can down the road. If we’re doing what’s best for the community, you put the whole thing on,” said Superintendent Francis Scruci.

“But we will lose,” Geer responded.

The focus needs to be on following the advisory committee’s recommendation which was for a high school, he said.

“We know what we want, but what we want is not what everyone wants,” Hovest said.

The deadline to get the paperwork on the November ballot is Aug. 10 for a property tax and July 26 for an income tax.

If a tax issue for a high school passes in November, it could open in fall 2024.