To amend sections 5715.012, 5715.16, 5715.251, and 5715.26 of the Revised Code to modify the process for making property tax sales-assessment ratio studies.
Summary
HB124 revises Ohio’s property-tax sales-assessment ratio study process, which the tax commissioner uses to determine whether real property is being assessed at the proper level for equalization purposes. The bill changes the statutory language governing how those studies are built, emphasizing that they be based on representative samples of open-market, arm’s-length sales provided by county auditors. It also allows appraisals to supplement the sample when there are not enough qualifying sales in a class of property, and it clarifies when the commissioner may use the studies and related information to equalize property values across classes of real property.
The bill also restructures the appeal process between county auditors and the tax commissioner. It expressly allows appeals to the Board of Tax Appeals over either the commissioner’s abstract-change determinations or the auditor’s representative sales sample, sets procedures for filing and exchanging records, and clarifies that the board may affirm, reverse, vacate, or modify the challenged determination or sample. In addition, it updates the enforcement provisions tied to compliance with property-value adjustments, including the withholding of certain state revenue distributions if an auditor does not timely conform the county abstract to the commissioner’s or board’s final action. The bill applies to tax year 2025 and later.
Impact
HB124 would amend sections 5715.012, 5715.251, and 5715.26 of the Revised Code, changing the legal framework for property-tax equalization studies and related appeals in Ohio. It affects the duties of the tax commissioner, county auditors, the Board of Tax Appeals, and, indirectly, county and school-district revenue distributions tied to property-tax valuation adjustments. The bill is prospective for tax year 2025 and beyond, and it would replace existing statutory language with revised procedures for sampling, appeals, and compliance enforcement.
Sentiment
The available voting record shows strong, unanimous support at each stage, with favorable committee passage and unanimous House and Senate floor votes. No committee transcript is available, but the absence of recorded opposition and the 0-nay votes suggest the bill was broadly viewed as a technical or administrative update rather than a controversial policy change. The overall sentiment appears positive and consensus-driven.
Contention
No substantive contention is reflected in the provided materials. The main policy issues implicit in the bill are the balance of authority between county auditors and the tax commissioner, the standards for what counts as a representative sales sample, and the enforcement mechanism that can withhold state aid if local officials do not comply. However, the unanimous votes and lack of transcript discussion indicate these issues did not generate visible disagreement in the legislative record provided.