Proponent says House Bill 129 would stop "unvoted" tax spikes by counting emergency levies toward Ohio's 20-mil floor

Representative testimony in favor of House Bill 129 described the measure as a change to how Ohio calculates the minimum guaranteed property-tax rate (the "20-mil floor"). The proponent told the Senate Local Government Committee that the bill would count emergency levies — which previously did not count toward the 20-mil floor — when calculating a district's guaranteed tax rate. According to the proponent, that change would remove roughly 237 school districts from the 20-mil floor, which the testimony said would reduce the unvoted tax spikes some districts have experienced when property values rise.

The proponent called the bill the "Truth and Guaranteed Tax Rate Act" and said it provides a "glide path" for districts that currently rely on emergency levies. Key provisions described in committee testimony include: - Counting emergency levies together with other levies when computing the minimum guaranteed tax rate (the 20-mil floor); - Allowing a school with a current emergency levy to renew that revenue as a fixed-sum levy for one five-year term (the testimony described this as a single five-year "glide path" renewal); - Preserving voter choice for any new or additional levies; proponents said the change would prevent unvoted increases that occur when the tax rate stays fixed while property values rise; - Preserving existing rollback credits (for example, nonbusiness rollback and owner-occupancy credits) during the five-year fixed-sum period, according to testimony.

Committee members asked substantive questions about the fiscal impact, the number and type of districts affected, and whether the bill contains a method to hold affected districts harmless. The proponent acknowledged that a fiscal note estimated statewide school-district revenue losses of "at least tens of millions" beginning in fiscal year 2026 but said that figure reflected lost potential future revenue (unvoted increases the districts would otherwise collect under the current 20-mil floor) rather than immediate reductions to current revenue streams. The proponent repeatedly distinguished between current revenue that schools already receive and the additional unvoted increases that occur when the 20-mil floor prevents rates from decreasing as property values rise.

Committee members also pressed on several practical points that the proponent clarified on the record: - Whether the discussion referred to 237 "schools" or 237 "school districts" (the proponent clarified the count referred to school districts); - That most of the affected districts are rural and generally smaller, and many urban/suburban districts are not at the 20-mil floor or have not used emergency levies; - That a fixed-sum renewal is intended to preserve the same annual revenue amount the district currently receives (the testimony described a fixed-sum renewal as "no new money" for the five-year period), though individual taxpayers' payments could vary depending on revaluations and local property-value changes.

The hearing concluded after questions and committee discussion; the bill had previously passed the Ohio House and was characterized in testimony as having bipartisan support there. No committee vote on House Bill 129 was recorded during this hearing.