“The organization has to remain solvent,” said board member and Hamiltonian Mark Rentschler. “We have to have operating funds in order to execute the routine maintenance and the work that the organization has to perform, frankly, each and every day. Those operating funds require an increase in the rate.”
Some Hamilton property owners, including David Stark of Keep Hamilton Afloat and ArtSpace Hamilton Lofts, say the uptick in rates will have a negative impact on businesses and residents during a time of high property taxes.
He said with the proposed rates, his bill would be 100% higher than his current rate.
“I hear the need to buy time, but that is too much. That is enough to solicit outrage,” Stark said during Tuesday’s meeting. “I want to believe in this. I see in your eyes that we all want a good situation here.”
The updated maintenance and capital assessments were approved by the board of directors but still need to go before the Conservancy Court before they will go into effect next year.
The Conservancy Court consists of a board of county Common Pleas Court judges, and the court will be in session on July 26 in Dayton.
The Conservancy Court in February approved $34.5 million in capital spending authority for the conservancy district.
The first phase of the Miami Conservancy District’s benefit assessment study will launch in July and span through December, according to conservancy district officials.
The study will include a look into the feasibility of charging properties across the watershed and additional research regarding credits that could be incorporated into calculations of flood protection charges.
MaryLynn Lodor, Miami Conservancy District general manager, said under Ohio law the conservancy district does not have explicit authority to grant exceptions or abatements for flood protection.
“I think our approach is to utilize the benefit assessment study that we’re doing to be able to pause every adjustment and pause the methodology and look at how we can broaden the definition of benefits and then potentially identify caps or credits, incentives or abatements in the methodology,” Lodor said. “I think there is a pathway for the Conservancy District to recognize tax credits, refunds or incentives. But we got to start at the beginning. And that is what we are doing with a benefit assessment study.”
Rentschler said he viewed the proposed change to the assessment rates as “a short-term issue.”
“I hope that this is something that is extremely limited,” he said. “What we want to be able to do is complete our mission and maintain our mission in such a way that we keep you safe, that we keep your property safe.”
The proposed increases to flood assessment charges elicited a loud response from Butler County residents in particular. Hamilton business owners have asked the district to consider charging more properties in the region for flood protection to divide the flood assessment responsibility.
The district provides flood protection in Butler, Hamilton, Montgomery, Miami and Warren counties. Less than 50,000 properties are charged flood assessments on their tax bills.
The Miami Conservancy District’s board of directors in May approved a pause to the reappraisal of properties that are protected by the region’s levee and dam system. The reappraisal of assessments followed the historic rise in property values in Ohio. Montgomery County saw an average increase of 34% in residential property value countywide as a part of the state-mandated triennial update last year. The average increase in Butler County is 37%.
This pause halted plans to implement updated property values when charging properties for flood protection in the form of assessments that appear on property tax bills. The last reappraisal made by the Miami Conservancy District was 12 years ago. Properties will still be charged for flood protection, but the calculation for their assessments will be made using property values from the last appraisal.
Data obtained by this news organization shows the assessments under the paused readjustment would have left owners of hundreds of properties across the region paying more than $1,000 a year for flood protection. This includes dozens of properties that could pay more than $10,000 per year; one property owner is looking at assessments of roughly $478,000.
About the Author
