The House Ways and Means Committee on Wednesday brought forward a substitute version of House Bill 309 that would change how county budget commissions review and, in some cases, reduce property tax levies and allocations.

Vice Chair Thomas moved to replace HB 309 with a substitute (AM360632-1) at the bill's first official hearing; the substitute was accepted by the committee on a roll call vote reported as 9-4. The committee then heard proponent testimony from Lake County Auditor Christopher Galloway, who said the measure would clarify and standardize authority for county budget commissions across Ohio.

Galloway, representing Lake County and speaking also as second vice president of the County Auditors Association of Ohio, described wide variation in how county budget commissions exercise authority today and urged the committee to give explicit powers to review levying entities and reduce rates in limited circumstances. "It turns out that depending on a county prosecutor's interpretation of decades-old AG opinions or conflicting languages in case law, counties are handling their duties and responsibilities differently," Galloway said. He said some counties act as a "rubber stamp" while others actively roll back levies, and that HB 309 would eliminate guesswork by making responsibilities clear.

Key elements described by Galloway and incorporated in the substitute version include:

- Allowing the county auditor and county treasurer to designate alternates to sit on the budget commission in some circumstances;
- Clarifying that a carryover threshold of roughly 30% in property-tax-funded funds would trigger a public hearing (the bill would not mandate action, only a hearing to review need);
- Granting the budget commission explicit authority to review inside millage, voted levies, bond levies, emergency levies and to suspend or reduce levies for the following tax year if the commission determines revenue is not needed; and
- Directing appeals of a commission's reduction to the Ohio Board of Tax Appeals to be decided in the same calendar year to avoid delays into the next tax year.

Galloway told the committee the legislation would also remove the veto power of the largest incorporated entity when counties renegotiate local government fund (LGF) formulas and asked that statutory LGF language be simplified because most counties use alternative formulas. He said some local levying agencies, including a county developmental disabilities board he mentioned, have built large fund balances in recent years (he cited a figure of roughly $60 million in reserves in one example) and that a budget commission should have authority to require public hearings and question the need for continued revenue increases.

Committee members asked about guardrails and local control. Representative Daniels noted the measure applies to all levying authorities, not only schools, and asked whether the bill essentially removes a "rubber stamp" in many counties. Representative Thomas and Galloway said the bill sets a uniform framework but acknowledged that application may vary by county and will be an evolving, year-over-year process.

The committee accepted the substitute bill after roll-call voting. The subbill's acceptance was recorded by committee staff as a 9-4 vote. The committee then continued the hearing, calling additional in-person and written proponents to testify.