HB 601 – HB 5′s Predecessor

HB 601 was a “one size fits all” tax bill co-sponsored by Ohio House Majority Whip Cheryl Grossman (R-Grove City) and Rep. Mike Henne (R-Vandalia). It was introduced to the 129th Ohio General Assembly on October 30, 2012 with the intent of promoting uniformity and simplicity within Ohio’s municipal income tax structure. In reality, the bill fell short of its goals.  If passed, HB 601 would have introduced legislation detrimental to the financial stability of Ohio’s municipalities. By including unfunded mandates and calling for the needless application of complicated bureaucratic red tape, the bill would have served to cripple the ability of municipalities to provide basic services to both residents and resident businesses alike. There were also several instances within the bill where Ohio’s municipal “home rule” provisions were either threatened or rendered invalid.

With the close of the 129th Ohio General Assembly and the introduction of the 130th Ohio General Assembly in January 2013, HB 601 was scrapped while still in committee.

Click here to read HB 601 in its entirety.

Effects of HB 601 on Ohio’s Communities

The negative impact that HB 601’s provisions would have had on communities across Ohio is staggering. Taking into account information provided by the impact reports received, Ohio United placed the conservative best-case scenario collective loss of revenue at over $36 million for 2014. This number was made all the more oppressive when considering the individual costs to Ohio’s municipalities:

City/Village Monetary Impact Total Revenue Gain/Loss
Athens Negative $200,000
Brookville Negative $180,600
Central Collection Agency (CCA) Negative Agency-wide, estimated between $5,105,500 and $7,280,500
Cleveland (Per CCA) Negative $6,000,000 in year 2014; $1,645,500 annually
Dayton Negative $3,625,000
Englewood Negative $790,000
Franklin Negative Estimated $378,185 to $482,591 annually
Kettering Negative $921,000
Lakewood Negative $570,000 in year 2014
Louisville Negative $260,000
Miamisburg Negative Estimated $462,000 to $730,000 annually
Napolean Negative $258,347
Oakwood Negative $394,945
RITA Negative Agency-wide, estimated $13,929,791
Trotwood Negative $703,694
Troy Negative Estimated $750,500 to $1,208,500 annually
Union Negative $21,300
Vandalia Negative $794,268
Warren Negative Estimated $482,075 to $1,130,575 annually
Total (2014) Best Case Scenario ($36,427,205)
Worst Case Scenario ($39,481,111)

When considered in conjunction with the unquantifiable costs of HB 601 (such as the threat to home rule and the introduction of complicated bureaucratic red tape), it became easy to see why municipalities across Ohio united to oppose this harmful bill.

HB 601 Resolutions

Akron Resolution HB 601
Athens Resolution HB 601
Bedford Resolution HB 601
Brunswick Resolution HB 601
Centerville Resolution HB 601
Clayton Resolution HB 601
Dayton Resolution HB 601
Englewood Resolution HB 601
Evendale Resolution HB 601
Fremont Resolution HB 601
Greenhills Resolution HB 601
Hamilton County Municipal League Resolution HB 601
Hartville Resolution HB 601
Hicksville Resolution HB 601
Holland Resolution HB 601
Huron Resolution HB 601
Kettering Resolution HB 601
Lakewood Resolution HB 601
Lima Resolution HB 601
Louisville Resolution HB 601
Miamisburg Resolution HB 601
Middletown Resolution HB 601
Napoleon Resolution HB 601
Oakwood Resolution HB 601
Piqua Resolution HB 601
Reading Resolution HB 601
Shaker Heights Resolution HB 601
Sidney Resolution HB 601
Springboro Resolution HB 601
Springfield Resolution HB 601
Troy Resolution HB 601
Vandalia Resolution HB 601
West Carrollton Resolution HB 601
Whitehouse Resolution HB 601

HB 601 Impact Studies

Athens Impact Analysis HB 601
Brookville Impact Analysis HB 601
CCA Impact Summary Memo HB 601
CCA Impact Analysis HB 601
Clayton Impact Analysis HB 601
DATA Dayton Area Tax Administrators Impact Analysis HB 601
Dayton Impact Analysis HB601
Englewood Impact Analysis HB 601
Franklin Impact Analysis HB 601
Kettering Impact Analysis HB 601
Lakewood Impact Analysis HB 601
Louisville Impact Analysis HB 601
Miamisburg Impact Analysis HB 601
Napoleon Impact Analysis HB 601
Oakwood Preliminary Impact Analysis HB 601
RITA Impact Analysis HB 601
Sidney Impact Analysis HB 601
South Euclid Impact Analysis HB 601
Troy Impact Analysis HB 601
Union Impact Analysis HB 601
Vandalia Impact Analysis HB 601
Warren Impact Analysis HB 601

Related Documents

Letters, White Papers, and Responses:

Memo to All House_Reps Grossman and Henne_11 1 12 HB601
Sponsor Testimony Rep Grossman HB 601 11-18-12
Sponsor Testimony Rep Grossman & Henne HB 601 11-18-12
RITA Memorandum Impact Analysis HB 601
Mayor of Columbus Letter to Rep Grossman HB 601 11-21-12
Mayor of Cleveland Letter to Rep Amstutz HB 601 11-27-12
Joseph Testa Letter to Groveport 10-29-12
Dayton Area White Paper
Dayton Area Uniformity Paper 6-19-12
City of Troy Letter to Rep Adams HB 601 11-23-12
City of Perrysburg Letter to Rep Gardner 11-26-12
City of Loveland Letter to Senator Niehaus HB 601
City of Dayton Letter to Rep Butler 11-26-12
City of Bedford Letter to Senator Turner 8-30-11
HB 601 Sample Letter to State Reps

OML Resources:

OML HB 601 Letter of Opposition 10-31-12
OML HB 601 Grievances
OML HB 601 OML Summary of Bill as Introduced 11-2-12
OML Letter to Rep Beck HB 601 11-27-12
OML White Paper

Information from HB 601 Interested Party Meetings Hosted by Representative Peter Beck:

IP Meeting Packet 10-10-12 part01
IP Meeting Packet 10-10-12 part02
IP Meeting Packet 10-10-12 part03