CANFIELD — After a recent lengthy discussion, the Canfield Board of Education decided to place a 5.9-mill, five-year levy on the November ballot.

All five board members agreed that new funds are needed to keep Canfield from falling below the required financial line. The discussion started with public input, during which levy committee member Jason Henry told the board a direction is needed so the committee can begin the work to sell a new levy to voters.

“We need better ways to educate the public,” he said.

“Everyone agrees we need a levy,” board president Steven DeMaiolo said. “The question is when and how much.”

He said the need for operating funds takes priority over the need for new facilities.

“As for our buildings, the need is not going away,” he said.

District Treasurer Ben Marko hosted a presentation in April where he noted that board regulations require the treasurer to stay above the 60 days of cash on hand limit. In the five-year forecast, that minimum would be breached without new money coming into the budget.

“I got as close as I could to doing just that and 5 mills would do it,” he told the board in April.

DeMaiolo said the levy can go in November, but the board would need to move fast.

“This all falls on the levy committee members,” said board member Betsy Ahlquist. “I feel we need a few more months to generate more funds and develop a good plan. I am in favor of going in May of 2027.”

Marko said if the levy is not passed until May, the funds would not come in until 2028, which would affect the five-year forecast. If passed in November, the funds would come in 2027.

“I am concerned about the funds not coming until 2028,” said board member Katie Elford, “so I favor going in November this year.”

Board member Nader Atway said the public needs to know the need for an operating levy. He said the three prior attempts for a levy to provide for new facilities is off the table as the need right now is for operational funds.

“If we had new buildings, the maintenance costs would be less,” Atway said. “The challenge we face now with our present economic atmosphere is getting an operational levy.”

He said the problem with the buildings is not going away, but the operational money has to be the focus.

Board member Jill DeRamo said if a levy fails, there is only one option.

“The only way to save money is through staff reduction,” she said. “It would be the only option we have, but cuts in staff would mean cuts in programs.”

All board members were in agreement to try in November. As to the amount, the board discussed the minimum that would be needed. Marko had said 5 mills would be the minimum needed to make it through all five years of the forecast.

“The numbers I have given is for going on the ballot in November,” Marko said. “If we switch to May, we will be having a different conversation.”

Maintaining buildings was a concern for board members, so they settled on another 0.9 mills, making the levy amount 5.9 mills. The levy is estimated to cost the homeowner $175 annually per $100,000 of the county auditor’s valuation.

The board must now hold two separate meetings to first approve the levy date and amount, get it certified, then hold a final vote to place it on the ballot. The two meetings must be done prior to August to make November’s ballot.

“When you put a levy on the ballot, 40% of the people will vote no; 40% will vote yes. It is that 20% in the middle who need to be reached and educated on why we need this,” Atway said.

After the levy discussion, the board finished up its other business, which included notice of an increase in lunch prices for the 2026-27 school year. The high school and middle school will go from $2.95 to $3, and the elementary schools will go from $2.70 to $2.75.