Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ohio bill would bar foreclosures on qualifying seniors, sponsors say it codifies current practice
Summary
House Bill 443 would prohibit county treasurers from foreclosing on homeowners age 65 or older who meet the bill’s value and payment-condition thresholds; sponsors said it codifies common local practice and does not shift costs to other taxpayers, while members raised questions about means testing, surviving-spouse transfers and state-level deferral options.
Vice Chair Thomas introduced House Bill 443, the Senior Protection from Foreclosure Act, during a House Ways and Means Committee hearing, saying the measure would prevent county treasurers from initiating foreclosure against homeowners age 65 or older who meet the bill’s value and good‑faith payment requirements.
The bill’s sponsors framed HB 443 as a narrowly focused change to enforcement procedures. "Grandma will not be kicked out of her home," Vice Chair Thomas said, arguing the bill would enshrine existing local practices and give seniors greater certainty. Joint sponsor Brett Matthews told the committee the measure aims to be "the smallest possible that solves the problem," and noted it would reference the Ohio Revised Code to clarify enforcement rules.
Supporters said the proposal simply removes foreclosure as an enforcement option for qualifying seniors and preserves county treasurers’ other authorities. "This does not shift the burden or cause more spending from other taxpayers," Vice Chair Thomas said, adding the taxes remain due and are paid on transfer of the property.
Members pressed sponsors on several points. Representative Daniels asked whether a state-level deferral or a program to make local governments whole had been considered; sponsors said a separate bill addresses state‑funded offsets and that HB 443 is intentionally limited to the enforcement mechanism. A committee member noted the bill’s means test relies only on property valuation, not household income, and raised the hypothetical that a wealthy senior could live in a modestly valued home; sponsors said valuation produces a clear, administrable rule.
The committee also discussed how the protection operates at death or transfer. A member asked whether a surviving spouse not listed on the deed could remain in the home; sponsors said the outcome would be fact dependent but that the protection would apply to a qualifying senior during the transfer window and that local statutes protecting surviving spouses still apply. Sponsors said county treasurers already typically use payment plans and discretion in enforcement and the bill would codify that practice for eligible seniors.
The hearing ended with sponsors reiterating their preference for a straightforward rule intended to offer seniors certainty while preserving the overall tax collection process. No vote was taken on the measure during the hearing; it received a first hearing before the committee and will return for further consideration.
