Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Property Owner Protection from Tax Valuation Challenges

Client Alert

New legislation provides significant new protections for commercial property owners against challenges to valuation primarily by local school boards and prohibiting side agreements to avoid tax valuation changes.  The Ohio Legislature has approved House Bill 126 which will go into effect July 2022 but will effectively apply to the 2023 tax valuation year. 

Prior to the legislation, a property owner or another party, normally the local school board, could file a complaint contesting a valuation for properties for the coming tax year.  The usual situation would be where a property has sold, the price exceeds the prior year’s tax valuation, and the school board seeks to have the real estate tax values be increased to the sale price.  The appeals are frequently filed seeking to increase the tax value on a retroactive basis.  For example, a property sold in mid-year at an increased price could be faced with a request to increase the rate of tax back to the first of the year.  Real Estate taxes in Ohio are assessed and paid in arrears such that taxes for year 2022 are paid in 2023. 

While valuation complaints are filed on behalf of the school board, in many counties, decisions whether or not to file tax appeals are handled administratively either by members of the board of education staff or in some cases by outside parties such as engaged consultants to review records and file complaints whenever a sale with an increase in price occurs.  In many circumstances, the elected representatives or members of the school board have no prior knowledge that a complaint was going to be filed or the impact that it may have on the property owner or businesses in their community.  In these instances, decisions regarding the dispute are in practice property owner versus staff as opposed to the elected representatives.  Further, the appeals are filed without prior notice to the property owner.  The owner in many jurisdictions in Ohio is not even provided with a copy of the complaint filed by the school board, but simply receives a notice that a hearing is going to be held on a contested valuation on short notice, leaving it up to the property owner to go exploring to obtain a copy of the complaint and prepare to defend their valuation. 

In some parts of Ohio, these processes became abusive, or were perceived as either abusive or lacked due process to the property owners and did not adequately balance the rights of property owners to contest taxation or provide for school boards to seek increased tax payments for the benefit of the school board in a fair and open manner.  

House Bill 126 significantly changes the procedural process for these types of complaints on valuation.  The new statute requires that decisions to challenge valuation by a “legislative authority”, which includes county commissioners, township trustees, boards of education,  mayors, or legislative authority of a city, are first required to actually give notice to a property owner that the legislative authority will consider at a public meeting a potential complaint regarding property valuation and the reason for that consideration.  The notice must be sent by certified mail to the tax mailing address of the record owner of the property.  There are some limited alternate address options, but the tax mailing address will generally be the place where notices are sent. 

Further, the legislative authority by resolution in public session are required to make a formal decision to file a complaint.  This means that the elected officials must be making decisions in public whether to file, not staff members or potential outside consultants engaged to do so.  

There are also new limitations placed on the values of properties against which complaints can be filed.  Currently, the legislative authority (primarily boards of education) can file on any increase in valuation however large or small it may be.  The statute expressly provides that the board cannot file a complaint unless the board claims that the property value has increased by at least 10% over the prior year’s tax value and the value of the property involved must be greater than $500,000.  The statute also provides that the $500,000 is to be adjusted annually and requires the Ohio Tax Commissioner to adjust that threshold based upon changes in certain indexes of the United States Department of Commerce for the prior year.  If the change in value is smaller than 10%, or the property value is less than $500,000, then there is prohibition against filing an original complaint to contest value. 

The rules are different however if a property owner initiates a valuation complaint.  If the property owner or their agent initiates a complaint seeking to reduce the value, the board of education may file a counterclaim, either in support of the change or requesting a different number, but even in those settings may do so if the amount in controversy exceeds $17,500 in taxable value. 

The statute also includes some provisions streamlining the obligation of time periods in which decisions must be made by the county board of revision or its equivalent and any failure to get complaints resolved within a year requires a business of the complaint.

The statute addresses and now prohibits “private payment agreements”.  In some jurisdictions, representatives of school boards would approach property owners indicating they will file a complaint seeking to challenge valuation on property, or would actually file a complaint, but then would agree either to not file or withdraw the complaint if the property owner made a private payment to the school board.  In these settings, the argument is that the school board says it will contest the value which might result in $30,000 of additional taxes, but if you pay the school board $20,000, they will not contest the difference.  In essence, the school board would get more money directly because the real estate taxes are not shared with other government agencies in the county. 

We certainly expect there will be litigation concerning the implementation of the statutory revisions, but at least this is a good step to provide those decisions on valuation complaints have to be made by elected officials, that complaints are to be limited to properties with larger values, and that increases have to be material in order to file a complaint.  This new legislation does not impact the triannual valuation process of the County Auditor. 

Please call should you have any questions or would like a copy of the statute.  If we could be of any assistance if you have tax valuation issues, please contact Scott Sandrock at 330-253-4367, spsandrock@bmdllc.com.


Valley National Bank/Trulieve Loan: A Big Step Out of the Shadows

In a late December press release, Trulieve announced that it had secured a $71.5 million commercial bank loan. In addition to the amount of the loan, which may be the largest commercial bank loan to date to a cannabis company, the release prominently identified Valley Bank and featured both a quote from Valley’s Senior Vice President, John Myers, and a description of the Bank’s service platform and commitment to the cannabis industry.

The End of Non-Competes? The Impact It Will Have on the Healthcare Industry

On January 5, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced a proposed rule that, if enacted, will ban employers from entering into non-compete clauses with workers (the “Rule”), and the Rule would void existing non-compete agreements. In their Notice, the FTC stated that if the Rule were to go into effect, they estimate the overall earnings of employees in the United States could increase by $250 billion to $296 billion per year. The Rule would also require employers to rescind non-competes that they had already entered into with their workers. For purposes of the Rule, the FTC has defined “worker” to also include any employees, interns, volunteers, and contractors.”

2022 Healthcare Recap and 2023 Healthcare Check-Up

As the country begins to return to a new “normal” following the COVID-19 pandemic, there are many healthcare rules changing on both the federal and state levels as a result. Thus, it is important for healthcare providers and their employers to be aware of these changing rules, and any implications they may have on their practice. Look back on healthcare in 2022 and find a checklist for 2023.

Direct Support Professional Retention Payments

On December 15, the Ohio Senate and House passed House Bill 45, which authorizes the Department of Developmental Disabilities (DODD), in conjunction with the county boards of developmental disabilities, to launch their initiative to issue retention payments to Direct Support Professionals (DSPs). These retention payments will be distributed quarterly to participating home and community-based waiver providers to address the workforce crisis in the direct provider sector. Governor DeWine needs to sign the Bill to begin the payments, but he is expected to do so by the end of 2022.

Real Estate Investors Position for 2023 Opportunities

Real estate investors weathered another year in a post-pandemic world, with the year closing with yet another interest rate increase coupled with both uncertainty and heightened interest carrying into 2023. Just last Wednesday, the Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rate 0.50 percentage points, shifting the target range to 4.25% to 4.50%. The new level is the highest the fed funds rate has been since December 2007 and marks the seventh rate hike this year. So what does this mean to investors, brokers, lenders, and others in the real estate world? Read a few perspectives below from stakeholders familiar with our BMD clients and the markets in which they do business.