Photo by Deb Gau Peter Martin, an attorney representing Milroy Public School, answered questions Monday night about Minnesota laws that applied to a petition to revoke the school district’s revenue referendum of over $3,400 per student. Martin said it wasn’t possible to revoke a referendum through a petition.

MILROY — There were strongly-held views on all sides of the issue. But the one common thread in a public forum at a meeting of the Milroy School Board was that the community needed to talk about the future of its school.

Taxpayers who were presenting the board with a petition to hold a vote on whether to get rid of the Milroy school district’s referendum revenue said they wanted to start that conversation — and potentially ease the burden of property taxes that spiked this year. However, after Monday night’s forum, it wasn’t clear what will happen to their petition.

Around 30 people attended the public forum portion of the school board’s regular meeting. Several people spoke, some in support of a petition to hold a public vote on whether to take Milroy’s current per-pupil referendum of $3,466.88 down to $0. Milroy voters had renewed the current referendum revenue in 2015. It’s set to increase each year by the rate of inflation, and is applicable for 10 years, beginning with taxes payable in 2017.

But petitioners said they were concerned when they saw their school tax statements for this year go up. Mary Ellen Busiahn, a taxpayer from the northern edge of the Milroy district, said she went to the Redwood County Auditor/Treasurer’s Office to compare what the taxes for the market value of her home would be at six area school districts, including Tracy, Lakeview and Marshall. The taxes ranged from around $550 to $907 in surrounding districts, while in Milroy they were over $2,000, she said.

“There is an issue here. This is a real problem,” Busiahn said. She called for the school to revoke its existing referendum and set a new one, or to form an exploratory committee to talk about the school’s options going forward.

Members of the school board didn’t discuss the petition during the public forum, or as part of their meeting agenda. However, after Monday’s meeting, Milroy Superintendent/Principal Heidi Sachariason told the Independent increases in property taxes reflected a recent expansion of the public school, and could go back down 25-30% next year.

Up until the end of the 2017-18 school year, Milroy was home to both the Milroy Public School and the Milroy Charter School. The charter school, which included students in kindergarten through fourth grade, closed in 2018, and the public school expanded to include pre-K through sixth grade.

Tax statements for 2017 didn’t reflect the increased enrollment at the public school, Sachariason said. The tax statements for 2018 included a “catch up factor” for the 2018-2019 school year, and that payment would go away on 2019 tax statements, she said.

Sachariason said this, along with the closure of the charter school, was one of the topics discussed at a series of community meetings in 2017 and 2018. She said the board held two meetings at the school, one with the Milroy City Council, one at a Milroy firefighters’ meeting, and one at a meeting of the local American Legion and Auxiliary. Information on the tax increases was also included as part of Milroy Public School’s February community newsletter.

There were other issues with the petition, which were discussed at the forum. Jason Lavoy, a former Milroy School Board member, asked whether petitioners understood the consequences of revoking the revenue referendum and replacing it with one of $0 per pupil.

Doing so, Lavoy said, “Will end this district.”

Busiahn disagreed, and said the district needed to have some kind of public conversation about the school’s needs and finances for the future. Other speakers also said it would be helpful if the public had more information about factors like the district’s tax base, school enrollment, and the condition of the school building.

After the school board meeting, petitioner Brian Vandeveire also said the intent of the petition was to start some public conversations about the future of the Milroy school, including school finances. Vandeveire said he too had seen a sudden jump in his projected taxes for the school district this year.

Another question raised Monday was whether the school board could even take action on the petition. Under a 2009 amendment to Minnesota’s school code, a vote to revoke a school district’s revenue amount can no longer be called for through a petition, said Peter Martin, an attorney representing the Milroy district.

Barry Gronke, Jr., an attorney representing the petitioners, said a different Minnesota law allows members of the public to petition to hold a special election. Gronke said the petition had around 70 signatures, which would be a “pretty significant” number of voters for the Milroy district.

After the public forum, it wasn’t certain what would happen next — either for the petition, or the conversations about Milroy Public School’s future members of the public said needed to happen. Both Gronke and Sachariason said it will be important for local residents to talk to school board members.

“The school district is sensitive to the burden on taxpayers,” Sachariason said Tuesday. But at the same time, school officials needed to balance both the public’s concerns and the needs of the school. “We’re working hard at weighing various pieces of information from people on both sides.”

“Milroy is a strong community. We value hearing all viewpoints,” she said. Sachariason said she would like for the school to hold focus groups, both to hear the public’s input and talk about planning the school’s direction in the future.