Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement
127 th General Assembly of Ohio
|
BILL: |
DATE: |
||||
|
STATUS: |
SPONSOR: |
||||
|
LOCAL IMPACT
STATEMENT REQUIRED: |
|
|||||
|
STATE FUND |
FY 2009 |
FY 2010 |
FUTURE YEARS |
|
General Revenue Fund |
|||
|
Revenues |
Potential negligible gain
from court costs and fines |
Potential negligible gain
from court costs and fines |
|
|
Expenditures |
- 0 - |
- 0 - |
- 0 - |
|
Victims of
Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 4020) – Attorney General |
|||
|
Revenues |
Potential negligible gain
from court costs and fines |
Potential negligible gain
from court costs and fines |
Potential negligible gain
from court costs and fines |
|
Expenditures |
- 0 - |
- 0 - |
- 0 - |
Note: The state
fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
For example, FY 2008 is July 1, 2007 – June 30, 2008.
·
The
GRF and the Victims of Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 4020) in the Attorney
General's Office may experience a negligible gain in revenues from a portion of
court costs and fines related to the change in the penalty for violations of
the Manufactured Home Park Law.
|
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT |
FY 2008 |
FY 2009 |
FUTURE YEARS |
|
|
Counties |
||||
|
Revenues |
-
0 - |
-
0 - |
-
0 - |
|
|
Expenditures |
Potential
minimal increase for county auditors to evaluate and assess taxable property |
Potential
minimal increase for county auditors to evaluate and assess taxable property |
Potential
minimal increase for county auditors to evaluate and assess taxable property |
|
|
Counties and
Municipalities |
||||
|
Revenues |
Potential gain from
criminal fines |
Potential gain from
criminal fines |
Potential gain from
criminal fines |
|
|
Expenditures |
Potential minimal increase
in criminal justice costs and civil court costs |
Potential minimal increase
in criminal justice costs and civil court costs |
Potential minimal increase
in criminal justice costs and civil court costs |
|
Note: For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year. The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
·
Counties
may incur minimal additional administrative expenses in order for county
auditors to make determinations as to what constitutes mandated and nonmandated
improvements for the purposes of assessing taxable property in manufactured
home parks.
·
Counties
and municipalities may experience gains in fine revenue as a result of a change
in the way Manufactured Home Park Law penalties are determined.
·
Counties
and municipalities may incur minimal increases in expenditures for criminal
justice activities arising from the change in penalties for violations of the
Manufactured Home Park Law and the costs of civil proceedings arising from
public nuisance claims in manufactured home parks.
|
|
The bill makes various
changes to the laws governing manufactured housing developments, most of which
do not have a fiscal effect on the state or local governments. The LSC Bill Analysis contains more detailed
information about these provisions. The
fiscal effect of the bill is limited to provisions related to manufactured home
assessments for tax purposes, the ability of residents to initiate public nuisance
proceedings, and changes made to the statutes governing violations of the
Manufactured Home Park Law.
Manufactured home assessments
The
bill requires the assessable value of a manufactured or mobile home for
taxation and auditing purposes to include only the value of the home and any
improvements made by the owner that were not mandated by any park operator or
rules governing a resident's rental agreement.
According to the Ohio County Auditors' Association, this is essentially
the same as current practice, though there is not always a distinction between
mandated and nonmandated improvements.
Improvements and attachments made to manufactured and mobile homes (such
as patios, carports, landscaping, etc.) are often not considered part of the
home itself because the home can be moved from its location, and are typically
taxed to the owner of the land, usually the park owner or operator.
It is possible that there
could be some gains in revenue from taxes on manufactured homes if it is
determined that park operators or resident associations have not mandated
certain improvements. However, any gain
in revenue would depend on the value of improvements deemed to be
nonmandated. As counties do not
generally make a distinction between mandated and nonmandated improvements,
county auditors could incur some additional administrative costs to evaluate
and assess the taxable value of these improvements. Any costs are likely to be no more than minimal.
Resident initiation of public nuisance
proceedings
The
bill adds residents of manufactured homes to the list of persons who may
initiate public nuisance proceedings and specifies that residential units
within a manufactured home park may be considered public nuisances if they meet
the same public nuisance criteria as other buildings that may be considered as
such. Current law defines a public
nuisance as "a building that is a menace to the public health, welfare, or
safety" due to structural or sanitary problems, inadequate fire safety, or
is otherwise dangerous or uninhabitable.
Under the bill, residents of a manufactured home park may bring a civil
action before a municipal or county court in order to effect abatement of such
public nuisances on properties within a manufactured home community.
County
and municipal courts may experience an increase in costs to adjudicate civil
proceedings arising from the addition of manufactured home parks to the public
nuisance law. Such costs would depend
on the number of public nuisance claims brought before local courts. However, they are not likely to be more than
minimal.
Violations of the Manufactured Home Park Law
The
bill extends the penalty for violating certain provisions of the Revised Code
dealing with the operations, development, and licensing of manufactured home
parks and the rules adopted pursuant to those laws. The bill changes the penalty to specify that each day of
continued violation constitutes a separate fourth-degree misdemeanor (M4)
offense. The maximum penalty for an M4
is a fine of $250 or up to 30 days in jail.
The county or municipality in which an offense takes place collects fine
revenue. Any gain in revenue would
depend on the number of offenses and the number of days for which individual
violations continue. A small portion of
court costs and fines would also be deposited into the GRF and the Victims of
Crime/Reparations Fund (Fund 4020) within the Attorney General's Office. Although they might gain fine revenue,
counties and municipalities may also incur minimal increases in criminal
justice costs as a result of the additional penalties. For example, as each day of violation would
constitute a separate offense, local law enforcement may bear costs for
processing additional offenses and prosecuting violators with multiple or
extended violations.
LSC fiscal staff: Brian Hoffmeister, Budget Analyst