MAHONING COUNTY Tax issue: Share or not to share?

Township officials want the county to keep sharing money.
By BOB JACKSON
VINDICATOR COURTHOUSE REPORTER
YOUNGSTOWN -- Mahoning County's financial ship could sink if it has to share its sales tax revenue with townships, according to a county official.
Mahoning County commissioners will decide Thursday whether to place a sales tax before voters in March or November next year, and whether a portion of the tax will continue to be earmarked for a revenue-sharing program with townships.
Auditor George Tablack said during a public hearing Tuesday that if commissioners continue the revenue-sharing program, it could be the death knell for the county's finances and its ability to borrow money.
"In my 17 years as auditor, I have never been more concerned about the county's finances as I am today," Tablack said. "I cannot overstate the severity of our financial condition."
Trustees respond
Several township trustees at the hearing expressed their sympathies for the county's plight but urged commissioners to keep sending the townships money.
"If you take this away from the people, I think you will see less votes [in favor of the tax] than you got in 2002," said Goshen Township Trustee Bob McCracken.
Trustees Valas Winters of Smith Township and Steve Gondol of Jackson Township also spoke in favor of retaining the revenue-sharing program, saying it especially helps smaller townships whose budgets are sparse and who have no other funding source.
They said removing the program from the tax would make it difficult to sell to township voters.
The county has two 0.5 percent sales taxes on the books, each of which has a five-year term. One of them expires Dec. 31, 2004, and the other was renewed last year.
Commissioners must decide whether to seek renewal in the spring or fall next year and whether to ask voters to approve it for a term longer than five years.
Use for money
When the tax was approved in 1998, commissioners pledged to set aside a portion for distribution to the townships and municipalities, which use the money for community development projects.
A portion also goes toward road improvements and maintaining certain county agencies.
Tablack says the county has lost money each of the past five years and is facing an empty bank account going into next year. That, he said, does not play well with bankers and investment advisers when the county borrows money for purchases and improvements.
He urged commissioners to drop the revenue-sharing program from the ballot language when the tax goes before voters for renewal, allowing that revenue instead to be used for general fund expenditures.
He also said the county should, in the meantime, restructure its current debt, which would net a savings of about $3 million or $4 million next year.
Tablack said that money could be used as a cushion until 2005, when the new tax would go into effect.
bjackson@vindy.com