BROOKFIELD — With a loss of nearly a million dollars in state revenue, Brookfield school officials are giving serious thought to placing a 1 percent income tax levy on the November ballot, in a move that, if passed, could net the district about $1.4 million.

Brookfield Superintendent Timothy Saxton said a finance committee - comprised of board members, the district’s treasurer, union officials, teachers, parents and principals - have been meeting in recent weeks to find a way to either reduce expenses or increase income. Recommendations from that committee will be presented to the school board at 7 p.m. Thursday at the high school.

Treasurer David Drawl  said finances have been in trouble since 2006, when the  district was declared by the state to be under “fiscal watch.”  The district faces a $449,000 shortfall this year and expects a $500,000 deficit next year, he said. If an income tax proposition is placed on the ballot and fails, it will almost guarantee the district will be placed under a “fiscal emergency,” he said.

Still, he and Saxton credit the board and school administrators with holding off an even bigger deficit by cutting staff, reducing or eliminating programs and waiving some graduation requirements.

Drawl said state auditors projected in 2006 that even with the budget trimming the deficit would be close to $6 million by 2011. “So we outperformed that by about $5.5 million,” Drawl said.

To keep the deficit as small as possible, Saxton cited several cost-cutting measures the district has already undertaken, including notifying 28 people - teachers and support staff - that they may be laid off before the start of school. Six teachers already have been  laid off, he said.

Additionally there have been several teacher retirements and those positions are not being filled; home economics and industrial arts have been eliminated; there is no full-time librarian  and buses are being maintained instead of replaced, Saxton said. He and transportation administrators annually discuss bus routes and look at changing them to increase efficiency, he said.

 “We are looking at everything,” he added, “including ways we can save on supplies, even down to how much paper we use.”

One revenue source that drew some hesitation from committee members involved charging fees for such extracurricular activities as football and band. Nearly half of the district’s students qualify for free or reduced lunch programs and by instituting a pay-to-play fee - even on a sliding scale basis - many students may likely be left out because they can’t afford it,  Drawl said.

Saxton, Bianco and Drawl  agree that state funding cuts are largely to blame for the district’s financial woes. Saxton said that in 1997 the Ohio State Supreme Court ruled that the way schools are funded was unconstitutional, yet that same system is in place today.

“There is too much disparity among districts,” he said. More affluent areas bring in more revenue from higher property taxes; districts that are not so wealthy receive less. Along with that, Saxton said, are the unfunded mandates -  programs and services the schools are legally obligated to provide - that come without any money from the state.

One of the reasons the district loses money from the state is because of Brookfield students who enroll in other districts and those who attend on-line schools. That accounts for about 70 students - and about a $700,000 loss of state revenue - Saxton said. He said he contacted all of those students and invited them to return to the district, touting a brand-new school. “I got four responses,” he said, “that said they may consider coming back.”

Voters  passed a levy in 2007 that allowed for construction of a new building that combines all grades into one campus. However, revenue that paid for the school to be built is separate from those needed for running it, he said. A 2005 property tax levy of seven mills failed.  The last successful levy for operating expenses passed in 1995.

Saxton said he plans to meet with state Rep. Sean O’Brien,who lives in Brookfield, to discuss the situation.

Bianco said the school is operating at state minimum requirements “instructionally” and said she doesn’t know where additional cuts could be made.  “We are already very thin. We didn’t leave many stones unturned.” She also added that while the language on the income tax proposition will say it is permanent, that may not be the case, if state funding is restored down the road.

Speaking in opposition to the proposed income tax, school board member Dr. Ronald Brennan said he doesn’t think cost-cutting  measures have been fully explored, including looking at wage freezes. Brennan said he would like to go line by line in the budget and “see where we can save.”

He also said he felt the decision to place the income tax proposition on the November ballot moved too quickly. and would like the topic “really vetted out in public.”

“The economy is down. People aren’t getting raises. You can only get so much out of people,” he said.

The board will vote on the levy issue at 7 p.m. Thursday in the high school auditorium.