Ohio Property Tax Bills Spark Debate Among Homeowners and Schools

Lawmakers in Ohio have passed several bills aimed at providing relief from rising property tax burdens, yet many homeowners express dissatisfaction, claiming the measures fall short. Public schools are also raising alarms, arguing that these changes compromise their funding.

One of the central issues debated at the Ohio Statehouse this year is the need to alleviate the increasing property tax pressure on residents. Lakewood homeowner Beth Blackmarr voiced her concerns, stating, “People are suffering, they’re losing their homes.” Her comments reflect a growing frustration among homeowners who feel the state is not doing enough to address their needs.

Public schools, particularly in Parma, are warning that the new legislation could further strain their budgets. Dr. Scott J. Hunt, the Superintendent of Parma Schools, emphasized the necessity for ongoing operational funding, stating, “We continue to need operating dollars.”

To address these issues, lawmakers have introduced four significant bills. State Representative David Thomas described them as “the most consequential in almost half a century.” House Bills 186 and 335 aim to limit the revenue school districts can collect from rising home values by tying tax increases to inflation. These measures passed with bipartisan support in both legislative chambers.

Another bill, H.B. 309, allows county budget commissions to reduce property tax levies. While this bill mainly passed along party lines, a few Democrats joined Republicans in approval, though several GOP members voted against it. H.B. 129 introduces a check on tax increases stemming from school levies. This bill saw overwhelming support in the House, but it faced opposition in the Senate, where all Democrats and state Senator Bill Blessing voted against it. Thomas commented, “We will no longer have huge increases in people’s property tax bills if they did not vote for that.”

Despite these legislative efforts, schools are expressing deep concerns about potential funding losses. They argue that these changes will lead to cuts in essential services. “We’ll talk about staffing, which impacts what programs we might consider to remain here at Parma and those that we might not be able to support,” Hunt explained. He noted that continued failure of levy measures could lead to dramatic reductions in school services.

The potential impact of these changes extends beyond education. Hunt indicated that the district may have to reevaluate transportation services and consider implementing participation fees or even closing schools. “Everything will be on the table,” he stated.

Blackmarr, who is advocating for the complete abolition of property taxes, expressed her desire for a solution that would not harm schools. She criticized the legislature for not taking more effective action to alleviate financial burdens on homeowners. “They knew they were supposed to do something,” she remarked, “They ignored it in favor of pet projects like the Browns stadium.”

As the debate continues, the effectiveness of the new legislation remains uncertain. Blackmarr highlighted the urgency of addressing the issue, suggesting that these measures should have been enacted much earlier. “This is a huge problem, and, by the way, a problem of the legislation’s own making,” she concluded.

The contention surrounding property tax reform in Ohio is likely to persist as stakeholders from various sectors weigh the implications of these legislative changes on their communities.