But to most Ohio property owners, that’s just Statehouse bafflegab: “Inside millage,” “rollbacks,” and other legalese. But the only legislative actions that can slow the pace of property-tax levies are Big Picture changes:
One: Ohio, No. 7 among states in population, has 611 school districts (not counting educational service centers, joint vocational school boards, etc.). California, No. 1 state in population, has 1,015 school, according to the California Department of Education. Texas, No. 2 state, has 1,207.
Dayton City schools enrolled about 12,500 pupils in 2023-24, the Dayton Daily News reported in January. But Ohio has many small-enrollment districts. To cite just a few: Clark County’s Southeastern schools (South Charleston) enrolled about 700 pupils. Mercer County’s St. Henry schools enrolled about 1,000 pupils. And Seneca County’s Old Fort schools enrolled about 650 pupils.
That’s not to say that those and other small districts don’t offer very solid schooling, safe buildings, greater individual attention and greater extra-curricular opportunities than pupils may get in big systems. But 611 Ohio school districts mean 611 superintendents of schools; 611 treasurers or business managers; 611 bus systems – in short, 611 bureaucracies devouring money that otherwise should be spent in classrooms.
Two: The legislature has refused to fully fund the Cupp-Patterson Fair School Funding Plan, again defying the Ohio Supreme Court’s 1997 demand that the General Assembly fully and fairly fund public schools.
Three: The General Assembly has gone hog-wild in diverting public tax money to subsidize non-public (often religious) schools, a policy a Franklin County Common Pleas judge recently ruled flat-out unconstitutional.
The Ohio Constitution, a document strangely unfamiliar to many General Assembly members, even though they must swear to uphold it, says this: “No religious or other sect, or sects, shall ever have any exclusive right to, or control of, any part of the school funds of this state.” The seeming reply of the Statehouse’s pro-voucher state legislators: “Whatever.”
Four: One of the best moves the General Assembly could make to reduce the number of property-tax levies from homeowners would be to end, or severely limit, juicy Ohio property-tax-breaks that fat-cat businesses lobbyists woo from public officials.
Real-estate-tax breaks for business investors have grown out of control in Ohio. Telling data from Statehouse testimony last year by Jon Honeck, a senior policy analyst for the County Commissioners Association of Ohio:
“The amount of [Ohio] property subject to tax abatements or tax increment financing (TIFs) has grown tremendously ... In 2014, [Ohio’s] local governments granted exemptions or TIFs to real property worth $9.8 billion. By 2022, this total had grown to $19.3 billion ...Tax abatements and TIFs originally served a purpose to lower the cost of a project in a blighted area that otherwise would not experience development. Now they have become routine and used even for greenfield [clean, open land] development,” Honeck told the Joint Committee on Property Tax Review and Reform.
That, ladies and gentlemen of the General Assembly, is a huge factor as to why real-estate taxes are burdening Ohioans homeowners.
It’s not a matter of double-talk about “inside millage” or how ballot wording describes a levy request (“renewal?” “emergency?” etc.) It’s a matter of serving cream to fat-cats – while shoving leftovers toward Ohio homeowners.
Thomas Suddes is a former legislative reporter with The Plain Dealer in Cleveland and writes from Ohio University. You can reach him at tsuddes@gmail.com.
About the Author