Hamilton County commissioners received an Oct. 21 briefing on options created by Ohio’s House Bill 96 that would let counties add ("piggyback") additional property‑tax relief to existing state relief programs. County staff cautioned that the state will not reimburse any additional relief authorized by counties under the bill, and commissioners discussed the budgetary and jurisdictional consequences of possible county action.

Jeff (county official) introduced the topic and asked Enrique Martin from the county budget office to describe the programs. Martin said two state programs are the basis for piggyback options: the homestead exemption (standard reduction for seniors 65+ and disabled homeowners under a household‑income threshold and an enhanced reduction for disabled veterans and surviving spouses) and the owner‑occupancy credit (a 2.5% credit on certain voted levies for a taxpayer’s primary residence that applies to levies passed before fall 2013). He noted roughly 33,700 parcels currently receive homestead relief and about 192,500 parcels receive the owner‑occupancy credit in Hamilton County.

Jeff explained a critical fiscal distinction: the state currently reimburses taxing districts for existing homestead and owner‑occupancy relief, but House Bill 96 allows counties to enact a piggybacked, expanded benefit that would not be reimbursed by the state. He summarized county estimates: an expanded homestead exemption would reduce the county general fund by about $654,000 and an expanded owner‑occupancy credit would reduce the county general fund by about $946,000; voted levies (children services, senior services, mental health, DD) would see an estimated total impact of about $5.6 million; and roughly $34 million in revenue reductions would fall on other taxing jurisdictions (school districts, municipalities and special districts) across Hamilton County.

Staff presented illustrative homeowner impacts for a hypothetical $160,000 home: the homestead piggyback would increase annual owner benefit by about $676 and the owner‑occupancy piggyback about $46 (staff committed to providing a $100,000‑home analysis at a commissioner’s request). Officials noted inside‑millage reductions are a separate authority under Ohio law; county staff gave an example: a 25% reduction in inside millage would lower county receipts by roughly $16 million and translate to about $19 of tax reduction per $100,000 of assessed value, but that approach affects all taxable property (residential and commercial) and all taxing jurisdictions.

Commissioners voiced competing priorities. Several said they favor targeted relief for seniors and low‑income homeowners but expressed concern about shifting unreimbursed costs onto school districts and special levies that fund vulnerable services. Commissioner Driehaus and others emphasized that state action is the preferable long‑term remedy and urged state leaders to adopt a broader, financed solution; Commissioner Reese and others pressed for aggressive county options in the near term and asked staff to identify flexible, short‑term actions the county could take while the legislature considers statewide fixes.

Staff and commissioners also discussed immediate related impacts from the federal government shutdown on SNAP benefits and other programs; the board directed staff to schedule presentations by the Free Store Foodbank and the county’s social‑service partners (including Michael Patton and CMHA leadership) to detail risks to food and housing assistance as federal benefits move toward a 30‑day cutoff.

No formal county action was taken Oct. 21. Staff outlined a statutory timetable for county action if the board chooses to proceed: the bill’s calendar allows counties to act for tax year 2025 in a limited window (Sept. 30–Oct. 31), and staff said any decision to piggyback relief would require a budget plan to offset unreimbursed revenue losses or use of general‑fund reserves.