Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement
127 th General Assembly of Ohio
|
BILL: |
DATE: |
||||
|
STATUS: |
SPONSOR: |
||||
|
LOCAL IMPACT
STATEMENT REQUIRED: |
|
|||||
·
No
direct fiscal effect on the state.
|
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT |
FY 2008 |
FY 2009 |
FUTURE YEARS |
|
|
Courts of Common Pleas |
||||
|
Revenues |
Potential, minimal at
most, gain in court costs and filing fees |
Potential, minimal at
most, gain in court costs and filing fees |
Potential, minimal at
most, gain in court costs and filing fees |
|
|
Expenditures |
Potential increase, not
likely to exceed minimal, offset to some degree by revenue gain |
Potential increase, not
likely to exceed minimal, offset to some degree by revenue gain |
Potential increase, not
likely to exceed minimal, offset to some degree by revenue gain |
|
Note: For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year. The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
·
The
bill permits a school governing authority to take action against nuisance
properties neighboring the school. Upon
taking action against a nuisance property, a governing authority is responsible
for all court costs and legal fees, which would vary considerably by
district. These expenses may be
recovered if the action concludes with a judgment in favor of the school.
·
Based
on LSC fiscal staff's research into the bill's effect on courts of common
pleas, the prevailing viewpoint was that, if additional nuisance abatement
actions are filed, it will be few in number and the costs generated to
adjudicate these matters would be minimal at most annually. Presumably, a portion of any associated
costs would be offset to some degree by any court cost and filing fees
collected from parties to the action.
|
|
The bill permits the
governing authority of a school to take legal action against properties
contiguous to or within one thousand feet of the school if the property is
abandoned and constitutes a nuisance detrimental to the school's mission. Governing authorities in this instance
include the board of education of a school district, the governing board of a
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics school, the governing
authority of a community school, or the authority in charge of a nonpublic
school.
Before taking action, the
school governing authority must conduct research to identify the owner of the
nuisance property and, in order to file a complaint, the governing authority
must show that the building is a nuisance to the school. Schools conducting preliminary research
could incur minimal administrative cost.
The governing authority would also be responsible for all court costs
and legal fees during the course of the court hearing. These costs and fees could vary considerably
among different cases and districts.
Schools have a choice in whether to take legal action against nuisance
properties; therefore all potential costs are permissive. If the court's judgment is found against the
nuisance property, the owner is liable to the governing authority for all court
costs, attorney's fees, and expenses incurred in repair or demolition of the
property.
In researching the bill's
potential fiscal effects on courts of common pleas, LSC fiscal staff spoke with
members of the County Commissioners' Association of Ohio, the Judicial
Conference of Ohio, and members of local boards of education. The prevailing viewpoint was that, if, as a
result of the bill, additional nuisance abatement actions are filed, it will be
few in number and the costs generated to adjudicate these matters would be
minimal annually. Presumably, a portion of any associated costs would be offset
to some degree by any court cost and filing fees collected from parties to the
action.
The reason most often cited
for speculating that the bill likely will not create many, if any, new nuisance
abatement cases focused on the fact that current law, not changed by the bill,
prescribes a procedure for filing an action in court to take control of a
nuisance building. Theoretically, then,
local boards of education and other school-related governing authorities can
presently file civil actions against the owners of nuisance properties; the
bill provides an alternative procedure for taking the same action.
LSC fiscal staff: Mary E. Morris, Budget Analyst
Jeff Kasler, Budget Analyst