Gathering for its regular meeting this coming Monday evening, the Waterloo School District will hold a public hearing regarding a tax levy that is notably greater than last year’s, with increased labor costs seemingly being the biggest factor.

Details regarding the hearing were included in a public notice that appeared in last week’s issue of the Republic-Times.

Per that public notice, corporate and special purpose property taxes being levied are $26,438,060 – a 9.02 percent increase from the $24,250,325 received last year.

Property taxes for debt service and public building commission leases are levied at $5,110,098 this year – up 5.17 percent from last year’s received $4,859,082.

Thus, the total levied property taxes for this year are estimated to amount to $31,548,158 while the district received $29,109,407, resulting in an increase of 8.38 percent.

As this percent increase is greater than 4.99 percent, the school district is again required to host a public hearing in accordance with the state’s Truth in Taxation law.

The district also had to hold such hearings in 2024 and 2023.

Waterloo Superintendent of Schools Brian Charron and Monroe County Treasurer Kevin Koenigstein both provided documentation on past tax extensions to put this year’s levy into further context.

Of particular note, the Waterloo school district’s tax rate in recent history peaked in 2016 at $4.35 per $100 of assessed valuation, falling to $4.08 in 2023 and reaching $4.12 in 2024.

While the 2024 tax rate appears unfavorable when compared to the rest of Monroe County – Columbia had a rate of $3.68 and Valmeyer a rate of $3.79 – Waterloo appears to have a fairly low rate compared to numerous school districts in the metro east, with similarly-sized Highland having a rate of $4.44 and Bethalto $4.49.

When it comes to the maximum tax rate for various funds within the district’s budget, $2.19 goes to the education fund, $0.50 to operation and maintenance, $0.20 to transportation, $0.05 to the working cash fund, $0.05 to the health/life safety fund and $0.04 to the special education fund.

As Charron explained last year amid the tax levy discussion, a major reason for the notable increase in the 2024 levy was to try and get the district closer to receiving that full $2.19 for the education fund.

In 2023, the education fund’s effective tax rate landed at $2.08. Last year’s rate got closer to the maximum rate approved by voters with $2.17.

Charron explained that a reason for this current substantial increase in the tax levy is the fact the district didn’t increase its levy commensurately with the increase in equalized assessed value in the past.

Specifically, 2023 saw an EAV increase of 12 percent for Monroe County while the district’s tax levy only increased by 7.62 percent.

In actuality, the district’s tax extension for 2023 was greater than the amount levied, thus the district received 7.7 percent more in property taxes compared to the previous year – though this still left a substantial gap between the EAV and the increase in property taxes.

Having placed emphasis on increased costs of labor to explain last year’s heightened tax levy, Charron offered a similar explanation for this year.

He pointed to the state’s $15 minimum wage, which arrived at that figure after annual increases in the early 2010s.

That was largely the start for the issues of competitive salary that the district has encountered, issues that have grown considerably in more recent years.

“Labor expenses have increased significantly over the past five years,” Charron said. “Salary increases happened across the board. Every industry saw increases in labor cost, and we were not immune to that. Our teacher pay was falling behind some of our neighbors and behind the industry. Teacher salary was falling behind especially when compared to some of our comparable and larger sized metro-east schools, all of which we compete with for teacher talent.”

Charron further pointed to a law concerning minimum teacher salary as well as the need to avoid inconsistencies in pay between daily substitute paraprofessionals and daily substitute teachers.

Recent increases in staffing costs have taken place amid major concerns of competitive pay and negotiations with the district’s two unions, the Waterloo Classroom Teachers Association and the Waterloo Association of Service Personnel.

While these pay increases help the district attract and maintain staff, they also inevitably affect the tax levy.

“Our board has made an effort the past five years to try to keep up with other districts so that we can remain competitive in keeping our employees here,” Charron said. “We had a number of employees that were coming here, working for a couple years and then finding another job in another district that paid more.”

Speaking on the district’s property taxes, Charron noted Waterloo is especially reliant on residential properties generating taxes where other communities have more commercial or industrial property – such as the Red Bud district with its power plant.

Along with the education fund and employment costs, Charron also spoke about the impact bond payments have on the district’s budget and tax levy.

“Of this $4.12, roughly, tax rate that we had last year, around 68-70 cents of that is paying off bonds predominantly for the construction of the high school,” Charron said. “I wish I could tell you that we have no other facility needs in the district and that we’re gonna pay those off in 2031, and everyone’s gonna see their tax rate drop by about 70 cents. I don’t see that happening because we continue to have facility needs in the district.”

He further noted that the district consists of five buildings, each at a different point in its lifespan, such as Waterloo Junior High School which is anticipated to see some form of repair or replacement in the near future. 

There are also administrators at all of these five district buildings 13 total, counting principals and assistant principals alike.

Though last year’s public hearing on the district’s tax levy garnered little in the way of public comment, a number of individuals have voiced their apparent frustration online about this year’s levy.