Home » Content

Granville Township Homeowners Pay 4% - 15% Higher Property Taxes

Thu, 10/01/2009 - 21:59

Granville voters have two tax levies on the ballot November 3rd. The newly formed Granville Recreation District is asking voters school-district wide to fund it with a one mill levy. The tax will replace a similar one-mill levy now collected only in Granville Township. A one mill tax costs about $70 per year on a $200,000 home.

In addition, Granville Township has a tax issue on the ballot for the ninth time since 2005. (Seven of the previous eight were approved.) This one would increase a levy for maintaining roads from 2.5 mills to 2.75 mills starting in 2011.

Granville schools account for about 80% of property taxes paid. Overall, Granville Township has the highest property taxes in the school district, about 4% higher than Village residents pay and 15% higher than those paid in Union Township.

A look at the property taxes we pay:

- no title specified


2008 property tax rate (in mills)

Granville Township

65.0

Granville Village

62.6

Union Township

56.6

Newark City

53.4



Granville Property Taxes

Residential property in Ohio is assessed, for tax purposes, at 35% of its market value — at least in theory. Thus, a $200,000 house would generate $70 in taxes for each mill.

Granville school district property tax rates on residential property (in mills)

Granville Village

Granville Township

Union Township

Newark City

Total property tax rate, all sources

62.6

65.0

56.6

53.4

COUNTY GOVERNMENT TAXES

County General Fund

1.9

1.9

1.9

1.9

1999 Mental Health and Retardation

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

2005 Children Services

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

2005 Senior Services

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

2006 Mental Health

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2007 Mental health and Retardation

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

Licking County Total

6.5

6.5

6.5

6.5

GRANVILLE EXEMPTED VILLAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES

School District General Fund

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

1976 Operating Expense

4.7

4.7

4.7

4.7

1977 Operating Expense

1.6

1.6

1.6

1.6

1985 Operating Expense

3.6

3.6

3.6

3.6

1990 Bond ($7,693,107)

1.6

1.6

1.6

1.6

1992 Operating Expense

2.4

2.4

2.4

2.4

1993 Operating Expense

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

1995 Operating Expense

2.2

2.2

2.2

2.2

1999 Permanent Improvement

1.2

1.2

1.2

1.2

2000 Bond ($31,220,000)

5.6

5.6

5.6

5.6

2000 Operating Expense

2.8

2.8

2.8

2.8

2001 Classroom Facilities

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

2003 Operating Expense

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.8

2004 Bond-Library ($5,175,000)

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

Granville school district total

41.9

41.9

41.9

41.9

LICKING COUNTY JOINT VOCATIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

1976 Operating Expense

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2002 Bond ($35,000,000)

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

Licking County JVSD Total

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

TOWNSHIP-VILLAGE-CITY TAXES

Township General Fund

0.1

0.1

x

x

2003 Fire and Emergency Medical Service

1.2

1.2

x

x

2005 Fire

2.3

2.3

x

x

2005 Parks and Recreation

0.9

0.9

x

x

2005 Preservation (Green Space)

2.3

2.3

x

x

2005 Township Road and Bridge

x

2.5

x

x

2007 Fire and Emergency Medical Service

1.0

1.0

x

x

2007 Preservation (Green Space)

1.0

1.0

x

x

2008 Cemetery

0.5

0.5

x

x

Township Road and Bridge

x

2.3

x

x

Granville Township Total

9.3

14.1

x

x

Granville Village General Fund

2.5

x

x

x

Union Township 2006 Fire and EMS

x

x

1.7

x

Union Township 2008 Fire

x

x

1.5

x

Union Township Road and Bridge

x

x

1.8

x

Union Township General Fund

x

x

0.8

x

Union Township Total

x

x

5.8

x

Newark City General Fund

x

x

x

2.0

Newark Fireman Fund

x

x

x

0.3

Newark Police Pension

x

x

x

0.3

Newark City Total

x

x

x

2.6

Total property tax rate, all sources

62.6

65.0

56.6

53.4

Commercial property tax rates in the Granville School district (in mills)

Granville Village

Granville Township

Union Township

Newark City

Total commercial tax rate, all sources

71.3

73.1

66.8

63.5

COUNTY GOVERNMENT TAXES

County General Fund

1.9

1.9

1.9

1.9

1999 Mental Health and Retardation

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

2005 Children Services

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

2005 Senior Services

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.8

2006 Mental Health

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2007 Mental health and Retardation

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

Licking County Total

6.5

6.5

6.5

6.5

GRANVILLE EXEMPTED VILLAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES

School District General Fund

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

1976 Operating Expense

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

1977 Operating Expense

2.9

2.9

2.9

2.9

1985 Operating Expense

6.8

6.8

6.8

6.8

1990 Bond ($7,693,107)

1.6

1.6

1.6

1.6

1992 Operating Expense

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.4

1993 Operating Expense

4.1

4.1

4.1

4.1

1995 Operating Expense

2.7

2.7

2.7

2.7

1999 Permanent Improvement

1.2

1.2

1.2

1.2

2000 Bond ($31,220,000)

5.6

5.6

5.6

5.6

2000 Operating Expense

2.7

2.7

2.7

2.7

2001 Classroom Facilities

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

2003 Operating Expense

5.9

5.9

5.9

5.9

2004 Bond-Library ($5,175,000)

0.9

0.9

0.9

0.9

Granville school district total

51.9

51.9

51.9

51.9

LICKING COUNTY JOINT VOCATIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

1976 Operating Expense

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

2002 Bond ($35,000,000)

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

Licking County JVSD Total

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

TOWNSHIP-VILLAGE-CITY TAXES

Township General Fund

0.1

0.1

x

x

2003 Fire and Emergency Medical Service

1.0

1.0

x

x

2005 Fire

1.9

1.9

x

x

2005 Parks and Recreation

0.8

0.8

x

x

2005 Preservation (Green Space)

1.9

1.9

x

x

2005 Township Road and Bridge

x

2.0

x

x

2007 Fire and Emergency Medical Service

0.9

0.9

x

x

2007 Preservation (Green Space)

0.9

0.9

x

x

2008 Cemetery

0.5

0.5

x

x

Township Road and Bridge

x

2.3

x

x

Granville Township Total

7.9

12.2

x

x

Granville Village General Fund

2.5

x

x

x

Union Township 2006 Fire and EMS

x

x

1.8

x

Union Township 2008 Fire

x

x

1.5

x

Union Township Road and Bridge

x

x

1.8

x

Union Township General Fund

x

x

0.8

x

Union Township Total

x

x

5.9

x

Newark City General Fund

x

x

x

2.0

Newark Fireman Fund

x

x

x

0.3

Newark Police Pension

x

x

x

0.3

Newark City Total

x

x

x

2.6

Total commercial tax rate, all sources

71.3

73.1

66.8

63.5

Bookmark/Search this post with:
»

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Trustees' latest tax hike--Vote no

Submitted by YesMan on Tue, 10/06/2009 - 12:21.

The Trustees want a .25 mill property tax hike to maintain the same amount of roads at a time when asphalt prices and road maintenance costs have fallen.
 
Do the Trustees need the money? The Trustees’ cash reserve — money in the bank — was at a  record $1.2 million at the end of 2008, according to the township’s most recent financial statement. The road fund and the general fund were both at record highs on Dec. 31, 2008. The township had tax hikes for roads  in 2004 and in 2006. This very levy went up .75 mills in 2006. Revenue has exceeded road maintenance costs every year
 
 So why are the Trustees asking for a $40,000 tax hike when they have record amounts of cash in the bank from two earlier tax hikesand while taxpayers are struggling in a recession?
 
It’s the Trustees being Trustees. They take your money because they can, asking over and over again for small tax hikes that Granville voters routinely approve as a matter of trust. This is a political strategy, not good government.
 
The Township is sitting on a mountain of cash — $7 million in all funds, as of Dec. 31, 2008. The Trustees have no reason to be back at the trough. Because of its nine tax increase requests since 2005, Granville Township has far more money than the Village, the school district or the library. Too much money has made the Township’s the most wasteful government in Granville — and that’s saying something!
 
Granville Township is, by far, the high tax jurisdiction in the area. Our high property taxes are blamed on the school district.  In fact, virtually all tax hikes in recent years are Township Trustee creations. The Township is hurting Granville as a whole — and Granville schools, in particular — with its strategy of high taxes for itself through repeated small tax increases. 
 
An unneeded road levy in the middle of a severe recession is utterly irresponsible.

»

Any info on the village?

Submitted by Buckeye on Tue, 10/06/2009 - 20:17.

I’d be curious to see a line item comparison of Township (taxes, spending, payroll, and especially miles of road serviced) and the Village (same).  Obviously, the village operates perpetually in the black, and have rat-holed over $2,000,000 above and beyond their bloated budget.  I’m glad they’re running in the black, but they also play games with their banking to make it look better under public scrutiny.
 
The township operates pretty efficiently as well with substantially fewer employees to service an equal number of households and much more road surface in their care.  Do they need an additional tax increase?  I doubt it, but I’d be curious to hear their opinion.
 
We need lower taxes, lower ‘fees’, and simply less government in and around Granville, the state of Ohio, and the United States.  Taxes are job killers, and it’s on us to step up and speak out.  We’ve waited long enough.
 
You’re on the right track YesMan, but broaden your comparison to include all Granville political entities.
 
I’d be curious to hear (read) your thoughts.

»

Why have higher taxes when higher taxes are not needed?

Submitted by Paul on Tue, 10/06/2009 - 21:08.

We certainly agree on lower taxes when possible.

 
The township has fewer employees because the township is doing much less than the village does. Providing water and sewer would be one example of services the village provides and the township does not. 
 
The difference in service level means the fact that the township has fewer employees is insufficient to indicate the township is operating relatively efficiently.
 
A good comparison relevant to whether or not the township road tax increase should be supported is the following (from a recent article):

 

"The Township has a rainy day fund equal to more than a year of spending. By comparison, Granville Village has a general fund balance equal to about one-third of spending. The Granville school district has an operating fund balance equal to about one-fourth of its operating budget. The average central Ohio school district maintains a fund balance equal to 12% of revenue. Bond rating firms generally consider a balance of one-quarter to one-half of a general fund to indicate strong financial health for a local government."

»

Newark taxes

Submitted by YesMan on Fri, 10/02/2009 - 23:27.

I noticed that Newark has only two special levies — one to pay fireman pensions, another to pay police pensions. Both these taxes are backward looking, funding the past.

By comparison, Granville has many levies investing in the community today and in the future. A divergence among two communities whose future is tied together.

»

if i could be so bold ?

Submitted by BOBMARLEY on Sun, 10/04/2009 - 10:14.

its been a few months now
but i should congratulate those that have revived the granville press
jack was a tireless worker with the press
but i must say
you folks have done a fabulous job of
restoring the news to town

thank you to those involved

»

hurray

Submitted by BALLUS FICTIOUS on Sat, 10/03/2009 - 15:53.

The rose colored glasses and pom-poms are strong with you when it comes to Granville…

»

bloated government

Submitted by BOBMARLEY on Fri, 10/02/2009 - 08:19.

ALL goverment is bloated
we the people should CUT taxes when ever
possible
over spending in government has been going on for years nation wide
along with restricting personal rights with the same moneys givin to these same governmental groups
shuffel the deck when ever possible with your vote

»

off topic

Submitted by Robert Karaffa on Fri, 10/02/2009 - 19:30.

Off topic here, been out of the loop for a few days. But did anyone notice the trimmed trees on S. Main are now gone?

»

i noticed

Submitted by BALLUS FICTIOUS on Sat, 10/03/2009 - 16:00.

i think it was best.

perhaps someone will find a tree better suited for that location prior to purchase and planting.

R.I.P. young Quercus.

»

quercus

Submitted by Robert Karaffa on Sat, 10/03/2009 - 22:58.

Were they quercus? I think they were maples not oaks of any type (and I could be wrong, often am.) However, there isn’t a better tree that will solve a structural problem with locating power lines. Not even the point. Its an attitudinal/aesthetic choice. Not just a semiotic or practical choice debate.

The great tall trees around here give so much relief (altitudinally and otherwise)that adds incredible ambiance to ones experience walking down the street or driving by around here. I like the way it looks now. I don’t like the way Granville looked in 1830’s pics with bare hills and scabby roads cutting it up. I mean, those photos are cool, really cool, but I don’t want to live in Granville looking like that; Though I would completely love living here during that time and maybe especially 300 years before that time. (If I could have certain modern medical remedies that I have found most useful after drinking water in certain latitudes.)

My point is that right now big tall maples, elms (if they are still alive)locusts, ash, cherry, poplar, cottonwood etc. look good lining our streets in the full, strong regalia of their maturity. Cut em down for what?? We can bury lines. We can build higher, stronger lines instead of burying. Why don’t we? Think how easily we can afford it.

»

Oak

Submitted by BALLUS FICTIOUS on Sun, 10/04/2009 - 11:59.

I do not like to hijack threads. This topic has been discussed in several threads now and
it would be nice if a moderator could round these up into one blog or story heading.
This debate takes a circular path through my mind, so if it seems I am speaking with a forked tongue it is not intentional.

quercus
Submitted by Robert Karaffa on Sat, 10/03/2009 - 23:58.

“Were they quercus?”
Yes they were Red Oak. Nice ones too, until …

”Its an attitudinal/aesthetic choice. Not just a semiotic or practical choice debate.”

IMHO all aspects of the debate must be given credence, aesthetics are important, practicality is also a concern. Let us learn from past experiences.

“The great tall trees around here give so much relief (altitudinally and otherwise)that adds incredible ambiance to ones experience walking down the street or driving by around here.”

The trees add an undeniable ambiance, as well as a host of other positive things. Great tall trees while majestic must coexist with a variety of things. The “wires” are only one example problematic to the size and location of said trees.
The fact that we currently enjoy having both mature trees and wires proves this coexistence can work. I feel the village should take a more proactive approach.
As discussed there are a lot of ways to “fix” this. A large part of this is the New American Attitude, “I aint getting paid enough to care, or, It aint my problem etc etc etc
Someone saw a way to let the mature trees grow without chopping their heads off or we wouldn’t have them now.
Horticulture and nature have provided us with an abundance of options; let’s use them wisely.
When it becomes necessary to plant new trees, pick a tree appropriate to the location.
Help nature shape the tree through educated proactive pruning. Don’t wait till it’s a problem. Through early pruning a tree can be allowed to mature with minimal impact on sensitive infrastructure.
Take the saws away from those that want nothing more than to see branches fall and hear the roar of the grinder making mulch.

“I like the way it looks now. I don’t like the way Granville looked in 1830’s pics with bare hills and scabby roads cutting it up.“

I believe that barren look was the result of logging and clearing. Lesson learned.
Apparently the denuded Granville was not favored then either, or we might not have all the trees now.

“Cut em down for what?? We can bury lines. We can build higher, stronger lines instead of burying. Why don’t we? Think how easily we can afford it.”

Cut them when they need cut. Make a “plan” for where to bury or raise the lines, these could be done while other construction is being done. We missed the boat on Main Street,
There could not have been a more opportune moment to clean up one of the “Gateway’s”.
Easily affordable???
Some commonsense planning could make it less painful monetarily, now there in lies the rub…
Common sense and governmental spending in the same sentence, isn’t that an oxymoron?

A decent text editor would be nice on here………………

»

oak

Submitted by Robert Karaffa on Sun, 10/04/2009 - 19:48.

Nice breakdown with good points in response. I told you I could be wrong about the species, and was. (Wish that wood was split and behind my garage to season for the wood burner.)
You added alot of good points and analysis. Some kind of plan is key as you said. There are branches on lines all over this town. Like at Pearl and College on the northeast corner. And that is a small tree.  Many of these trees were of decent size before there was power in this town. Conservative trimming would work for the way things are now. But burying in conjunction w/ new projects is a really good idea. And going a step further and burying it all..is a better one perhaps? (Its not going to be easy and will make a big mess temporarily.)
In another matter; For the relatively small number of comments here I don’t think we need to bundle, it all flows pretty nicely.

»

they were raped

Submitted by BOBMARLEY on Sun, 10/04/2009 - 10:06.

but i suppose they look better cut down
than the way they were ” shaped ”

»