New tax ideas needed

Improvise, adapt, overcome; Innovate or die. These are mantras that many local Ohio governments and taxing entities like school districts are coming to grips with as taxpayers have increasingly shown an unwillingness to support tax levies at the ballot. At the state level, there has been some property tax reform in the legislature, along with more drastic direct proposals from politicians like Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, who has suggested substantial cuts to Ohio property taxes. Others, meanwhile, want to eliminate the state's property tax entirely. While we remain unconvinced that simple cuts or elimination of property tax will solve Ohioans' tax woes, not to mention the detriment that would have to local school and government services, it is clear continued reform is needed and that governments must think differently about how they get and spend their money. At the local level, we're encouraged by some of the actions taken in places like Erie and Ottawa counties in this regard — from suspending property tax collections to an Erie County Blue Ribbon Commission exploring ways to increase government efficiency by eliminating redundancies in services to cut costs, and by extension, rely less on the taxpayer. Most recently, a number of Erie County governments — those in Sandusky, Huron, Vermilion, Milan along with county commissioners — took part in a joint study regarding water services. In essence, municipalities have their own water infrastructure and treatment plants. The question the study seeks to answer is whether combining infrastructure and services could be beneficial to offset rising costs while maintaining a reliable service network. With this study to examine regionalizing water services, those behind the effort are pondering if coordinating infrastructure and services can lower or maintain rates paid by local water customers, as well as mitigate potential future rate increases. This effort is far from the finish line — it's still much in the concept/feasibility stage, it seems. It remains to be seen if consensus can be reached and if this idea will come to fruition. But the stated goals of this initiative — maintaining the current level of public services while reducing the need to rely on taxpayer funding — are certainly worth exploring, and it's an idea we can support. In our view, it's a proactive approach from a group of government officials who can see the writing on the wall, that the area's population is declining and the taxpayers who remain are just not going to be as open to paying new taxes as in years past. Editorial board