Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement

124 th General Assembly of Ohio

Ohio Legislative Service Commission

77 South High Street, 9th Floor, Columbus, OH 43266-0342 ² Phone: (614) 466-3615

² Internet Web Site: http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/

BILL:

Sub. H.B. 338

DATE:

April 16, 2002

STATUS:

As Reported by Senate Energy, Natural Resources & Environment

SPONSOR:

Rep. Core

LOCAL IMPACT STATEMENT REQUIRED:

No -

Minimal cost

 


CONTENTS:

To eliminate the authority for referendums on assessments levied for improvements under the soil and water conservation statutes and to require that property owners be notified of uniform assessments under those statutes by first class mail in lieu of notification by publication

 

State Fiscal Highlights

 

·        No direct fiscal effect on the state.

Local Fiscal Highlights

 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

FY 2002

FY 2003

FUTURE YEARS

Counties

     Revenues

Minimal increase

Minimal increase

Minimal increase

     Expenditures

Minimal effect

Minimal effect

Minimal effect

Note: For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year. The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.

 

·        By eliminating the requirement for a referendum, the bill could very minimally decrease county expenditures for paper, printing, and filing costs.  However, the objection and appeal process could be applied to uniform assessments.  With the elimination of the referendum process, it is possible more objections and appeals could be initiated which might increase costs for counties. 

·        Currently, the notice to property owners by first class mail is only applicable to varied assessments.  This bill would make the first class mail requirement applicable to uniform assessments as well. The mailed notice must include a description of the method used to determine the necessity for and the amount of the proposed assessment.  The description of the assessment could be quite lengthy depending on the scope of the improvement project.  Depending on the number of property owners involved and the scope of the project, the county soil and water conservation districts could see an increase in mailing costs.   

·        Under the bill, county recorders are required to record any property use restrictions as a result of the State Fire Marshal’s underground storage tank regulations.  This may increase county expenditures minimally. However, the Ohio County Recorders Association stated that there would be a fee required as a result of recording this information.  The fee would be the standard $14 for the first two pages and $4 for any additional pages, which would be paid by the responsible property owner.


 


 

Detailed Fiscal Analysis

 

This bill would repeal the authority and procedures for a referendum involving the levying of a uniform assessment for an improvement by a soil and water conservation district.  Counties may potentially save money if referendums are repealed due to a reduction in printing, paper, and filing fees.  However, costs for counties may increase because the objection and appeal process would be valid for uniform assessments.  As such, it is possible that more objections and appeals would be filed.  The Ashland County Soil and Water Conservation District had only two referendums in the last five years. As a result, it is likely that there would be few additional appeals brought forward in most counties.

 

Under H.B. 338, property owners charged uniform assessments must be notified by first class mail.  This currently only applies to property owners charged varied assessments.  There is also a requirement that a description of the method used to determine the assessment and the amount of the assessment be included in the notice.  This would increase postage costs.  The amount of the increase would be dependent upon the number of property owners involved and the scope of the project.

 

The bill also requires county recorders to record any property use restrictions in addition to deeds and related documentation as a result of the State Fire Marshal’s underground storage tank regulations.  County recorders currently maintain similar data.  There would be a fee for recording this information, which would cause an increase in revenues.  The property owner responsible would pay the fee.

 

LSC fiscal staff:  Wendy Risner, Budget Analyst

 

\\Budget_office\isis_vol1.lbo\FN124\HB0338SR.doc