EAST LIVERPOOL Ruling slashes city's funds; commission decisions stand

The decision keeps a formula that has stripped the city of thousands of dollars.
By NORMAN LEIGH
VINDICATOR SALEM BUREAU
LISBON -- A visiting judge has rejected East Liverpool's efforts to have declared unconstitutional a method of distributing tax dollars known as local government funds.
In an opinion issued recently in the Columbiana County Common Pleas Court case, retired Judge John Milligan determined that the city should have made its constitutionality argument before the Ohio Supreme Court.
The ruling keeps in place decisions made by the county budget commission this year and last year that slash East Liverpool's share of the local government funds.
In August, the budget commission adopted a distribution formula that gives East Liverpool about 5.1 percent, or nearly $245,115, of the estimated $4.8 million in local government funds allocated to Columbiana County in 2004.
Similar reduction
East Liverpool was slapped with a similar reduction by the budget commission -- made up of the county prosecutor, auditor and treasurer -- when the 2003 funds were distributed.
At one time, East Liverpool received nearly 27 percent of the annually distributed funds.
East Liverpool used its veto power as the county's largest city to reject any alternate formulas proposed by the budget commission that would have reduced the city's share.
County, village and officials from other cities in the county had long complained that East Liverpool's nearly 27 percent share was too large and robbed other communities of their portion.
In 2002, however, the state passed a law that permitted local communities to strip East Liverpool of its veto power and adopt a formula that more equitably distributes local government funding.
Protested
East Liverpool has protested the new formulas to the state tax appeals board and the Ohio Supreme Court.
In his decision, Judge Milligan determined that the city should have pursued its unconstitutionality claim to the Ohio Supreme Court but failed to do so.
The city is not "entitled to a second bite of the apple" by challenging the constitutionality in common pleas court, Judge Milligan stated.
The city had filed the lawsuit in common pleas in May, naming as defendants the county budget commission and villages, townships and cities in the county.