Lakewood Gets Some Support in Opposition to House Bill 5
The Ohio Municipal League and communities from across Ohio submitted one uniform message containing “twenty-one points of municipal income tax uniformity” to the state representatives who introduced the measure.
City officials didn’t like the idea of the state taking over income tax collection when it was introduced as House Bill 601 last year.
And they still didn’t like it when it was reintroduced as HB 5 earlier this year.
Lakewood officials took the lead in creating a website specifically geared to opposition the tax measure.
And earlier this year, Lakewood City Council passed a resolution officially opposing the measure that would “gut the home-rule guarantees of the Ohio Constitution by imposing a state-mandated tax scheme on local governments.”
The Ohio Municipal League and communities from across Ohio — including those surrounding Cleveland, Dayton, and Cincinnati — submitted one uniform message containing “twenty-one points of municipal income tax uniformity” to state representatives Cheryl Grossman (R-Grove City) and Michael Henne (R-Vandalia).
Those suggestions came after Grossman asked for input from state officials from around the state about possible changes to House Bill 5.
“Purported to be an attempt at revenue neutral tax uniformity and simplicity, HB 5 will complicate the current 40-page municipal tax code with 141 pages of new rules and regulations,” according to a Lakewood news release.
“Some poorly conceived provisions found in HB 5 will cost cities and villages upwards of $35.1 million in revenue according to information submitted by municipalities across Ohio to advocacy group Ohio United.”
Lakewood officials have said the measure could cost the city millions of dollars in lost revenue.
"The notion that 'one size fits all' as uniformity defies common sense,” said Mayor Michael Summers, who is also the vice-chair of the Northeast Ohio First Suburbs Consortium.
“The proposed Tax Policy Board takes away the authority and wisdom of locally elected city councils, violating the very essence of home rule provision which has guided and served local communities for over 200 years.”