Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Property Tax Legislation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Finance director warns state proposals could cut North Royalton property‑tax revenue

North Royalton Finance Committee · July 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Finance Director Jenny Esarey told the Finance Committee several state bills could reduce or replace local property‑tax revenue; she said the city’s inside millage is about $3.3 million and losing it would significantly affect the General Fund.

At the July 15 Finance Committee meeting, Finance Director Jenny Esarey walked members through several pending or stalled state bills that, if enacted, could change the city’s property‑tax structure. Esarey said House Bill 187 (a circuit‑breaker style proposal) appears to be dead; she noted House Bill 28 (replacement levies) was included in the state budget but vetoed by the Governor and that legislators plan to consider veto overrides. She said House Bill 335, which would eliminate the inside millage, has seen little movement but would be "detrimental to the City" if enacted.

Esarey gave a concrete figure for the inside millage: "The inside millage is about $3.3 million," she said, and clarified that those funds currently support the General Fund, bond retirement, and police and fire pension funds. When Committee Chair Paul Marnecheck sought context on scale, Esarey noted the city’s total budget is substantially larger (roughly in the $50 million range) and offered to provide a fund‑by‑fund breakdown to show exactly how the inside millage supports the General Fund and other restricted funds.

Esarey also tied recent positive income‑tax receipts in part to a Delinquency Program, which she said accounted for about $450,000. She said staff and the Mayor plan to contact legislators about veto overrides and to remind state lawmakers of the potential local impacts of the proposals discussed. The committee did not take formal action on state legislation during the meeting.