LISBON Hoppel is against imposing rise in tax

The county's financial position has worsened, leading to layoffs in some departments.
By NORMAN LEIGH
VINDICATOR SALEM BUREAU
LISBON -- Columbiana County Commissioner President Jim Hoppel said he is maintaining his "just say no" stance when it comes to imposing an increase in the county sales tax.
Hoppel voted against the last sales tax imposition approved Dec. 27 by commissioners Sean Logan and Dave Cranmer. The measure was later rescinded before any revenue could be collected.
Hoppel said Monday that he will vote against an imposition again, if the issue makes another appearance before commissioners this summer.
He called imposing the tax a short-term fix that would anger voters and strengthen their opposition to the measure.
Imposing a 0.5 percent increase in the sales tax is among the options available to commissioners as the board struggles to find a way to produce more revenue for the county's cash-strapped general fund. The fund is about $4 million short of the amount needed to run county government this year.
Raising the county sales tax to 1.5 percent would bring in about an additional $3 million annually.
The sales tax imposed in December was rescinded in January after area residents undertook a referendum effort that could have blocked collections on the imposed tax.
Instead, commissioners placed the issue on the May primary ballot.
County layoffs
Voters rejected the measure, and the county's financial position has since worsened.
Layoffs have occurred in some departments, including the sheriff's department. Other county offices are operating less than five days a week.
Last week, commissioners set public hearings, required by law, to gather input on such options as imposing an increase or putting the matter before voters in November or both.
The hearings are set for 9 a.m. June 24 and 5 p.m. June 27 in the commissioners' courthouse meeting room.
Only two of three possible votes are needed for commissioners to impose a sales tax increase.
But a unanimous vote for an increase would mean that a referendum could not block collections of the tax.
A 2-1 vote, however, would allow a referendum effort to be mounted that could stop the county from collecting any revenue from the imposed increase.
"I'm not against the tax," Hoppel emphasized.
He said he just prefers asking voters to adopt it at the polls.