Wednesday, May 13, 2026
  1. HB 82: Report Card Changes for the 2021–22 School Year
  2. Analysis of November 2025 School Levy Results
  3. Analysis of Ohio Residential Property Taxes: A Balanced Approach to Reform
  4. Ohio Economically Disadvantaged Cost Study
  5. OEPI Analysis of Property Tax Provisions in the FY26–27 State Budget
  6. Revenue Generated by Emergency & Substitute Levies
  7. Impact of the Proposed Elimination of Inside Millage
  8. OEPI Analysis of the Impact of Eliminating Inside Millage
  9. Dr. Fleeter’s Testimony on HB 96 (Senate Education Committee)
  10. Ohio Property Tax Trends (1975-2023)
  11. State Share of Base Cost Funding FY99-FY19
  12. Dr. Fleeter’s Testimony on HB 96 (House Education Committee)
  13. Factors Behind the Transitional Aid Guarantee
  14. OEPI Analysis of Administrator Data
  15. OEPI Initial Analysis of Executive Budget K-12 Funding Proposal
  16. OEPI Analysis of Cupp Report Administrator Data
  17. OEPI Analysis of K-12 Budget Proposal
  18. OEPI Review of Ohio School Finance Study
  19. November 2024 School Levies Overview
  20. OEPI’s Ohio Special Ed Cost Analysis
  21. Ohio Property Tax Reappraisal Trends
  22. FY24 vs FY25 State Foundation Funding Comparison
  23. 2003-2023 Ohio Property Tax Reappraisal Analysis
  24. FY24 vs. FY25 School Funding Comparison
  25. Testimony on Property Tax Review and Reform
  26. Ohio School Funding Summary from FY11-FY24
  27. Dr. Fleeter on 10WBSN’s Report on Ohio Sports Gaming Revenue
  28. Dr. Fleeter’s Summary of Replacement Levy Utilization by Ohio School Districts (2014–2023)
  29. Ohio Property Tax Trends (1975–2022)
  30. OEPI HB 920: Updated Explanation
  31. Ohio School Voucher Overview
  32. Overview of Senate FY24–25 State Budget
  33. Constructing an Adequate School Funding Formula
  34. Summary of LSC HB 1 Fiscal Note
  35. House Bill 1 Summary & Analysis
  36. OEPI Economically Disadvantaged Student Cost Study
  37. Ohio Gifted Education Incentives Study
  38. Ohio Educational Service Center Cost Study
  39. Ohio English Learner Cost Study
  40. Ohio Gifted Funding Accountability Study
  41. Ohio Special Ed Cost Study
  42. New vs. Renewal Operating Levies (1994-2022)
  43. FY22 Report Card Analysis
  44. Overview of November 2022 Ohio School Levies
  45. Solar Energy Property Taxes vs. PILOT for Energy Projects (PPT)
  46. Solar Power Installation Property Taxes vs. PILOT Comparison
  47. CAUV Formula Change Analysis
  48. 2003-2022 Levies by Election
  49. New vs. Renewal and Replacement Operating Levies (1984-2022)
  50. School Operating Levies (1976-2022)
  51. School Operating & Capital Levy Totals, By Year (1984-2022)
  52. Changes in Ohio School Funding & TPP Replacement (FY11–FY22)
  53. Overview of May 2022 Ohio School Levies on the Ballot
  54. Overview of the Ohio Senate’s FY22-23 School Funding Formula
  55. The Central Importance of the DeRolph Rulings to School Funding in Ohio
  56. HB 82 Report Card System Changes
  57. Ohio Income Tax Changes and Equity (1972–2021)
  58. HB 110 EdChoice Voucher Program Changes
  59. HB 110 School Funding Formula Changes
  60. Ohio School Funding Trends (FY11–FY21)
  61. Ohio FY20 GRF Tax Revenue: COVID Impact & Recovery
  62. Ohio Solar Energy & Impact on School District Revenues
  63. House & Senate Bills Seek to Revise Ohio’s School Report Card
  64. OEPI Testimony on HB 110 School Funding
  65. Dr. Fleeter’s Testimony to the Senate Primary and Secondary Education Committee on HB 110.
  66. Updated: COVID-19 Impact on Ohio GRF Revenues (FY20 & FY21)
  67. 2020 Ohio School Levy Summary & Analysis
  68. HB 305 School Funding Plan Overview
  69. EdChoice Voucher Program Update
  70. OEPI President Message on OEPI’s Value
  71. OEPI Property Trends Report (1975-2015)
  72. Update: Appeal of Natural Gas Pipeline Values
  73. Update on Ohio’s Controversial Territory Transfer Law
  74. COVID-19 Impact on Ohio GRF Revenues (FY20 & FY21)
  75. Supplemental Funding for Power Plant Districts
  76. OEPI Officers Update
  77. Appeal of Natural Gas Pipeline Values
  78. Ohio’s Controversial Territory Transfer Law
  79. 2019 Ohio School Levy Summary & Analysis
  80. Analysis of the Cupp-Patterson School Funding Proposal (HB 305)
  81. OEPI Press Release on 20 Years of School Funding Post-DeRolph
  82. 20 Years of School Funding Post-DeRolph
  83. OEPI Analysis of Ed Trust “2018 Funding Gaps” Report
  84. OEPI Research Update: GRF Revenues, School Funding, and District Trends (2017)
  85. House Finance Primary and Secondary Ed Subcommittee House Bill 49 Testimony
  86. Analysis of HB 398 & SB 246 Changes to Ohio’s CAUV Formula
  87. OEPI Research Update: GRF Revenues, Funding Formula Issues & School Levies (2016)
  88. Community School Funding & Ohio Education Finance Trends
  89. CS Deduction and the Gain Cap
  90. Open Enrollment
  91. FY16-17 GRF Tax Revenues
  92. Casino & VLT Revenues
  93. OEPI Value Added Newsletter Article
  94. Senate Bill 208 Modifications to TPP Replacement Payments
  95. 2015 School Levy Update
  96. FY 16-17 Guarantee & Gain Cap
  97. Preliminary FY 15 Ohio Test Score Analysis
  98. Video Lottery Terminal (VLT) Revenue Update
  99. FY16-17 Phase-Out of TPP Replacement Payments
  100. FY16-17 School Funding Components
  101. Casino Tax Revenue Update
  102. Budget Bill Changes Election Law
  103. Transitional Aid Guarantee Analysis
  104. School Funding Comparison & Analysis: FY15 vs. FY17 Plans
  105. Recent Changes in Ohio Property Valuations
  106. State/Local Share of Funding in FY14-15 as Proposed by the Governor and House for FY16-17

At almost literally the 11th hour in the FY20-21 budget process in late June, the legislature included a provision in the conference committee’s version of the budget bill which provides a much easier route for certain township residents to move from one school district to another. This provision, which had originally been included in the House-passed version of the budget, removed by the Senate and then subsequently added back during the conference committee process, allows residents of a township that is located in more than one school district to vote to move their property from one school district to another.

 

Whereas existing Ohio law required the State Board of Education to approve the transfer of any territory from one school district to another, the newly enacted legislation allows any number of residents of a township which is located in more than one school district to file a petition with the county board of elections proposing the transfer, with a vote at the next primary, general or special election. The only requirement of the petition is that 10% of the petitioners must have voted in the most recent general election. Crucially, only the petitioners would be allowed to vote at the election on whether the territory transfer should be approved, with a majority “yes” vote required for approval. Other township residents and residents of the school districts that the territory would be transferred from or to are not allowed to vote on the territory transfer.

 

Additionally, the newly enacted legislation does not establish a minimum number of petitioners required, which means that a single person could successfully file a territory transfer petition so long as they voted in the most recent general election. Furthermore, in the event that there is more than one petitioner, there is no requirement that the petitioners live adjacent to one another, meaning that the territory to be transferred can be a series of unconnected parcels. Imagine a street where residents in every other home wish to be transferred to a different school district. A petition that has each of these houses included would be valid (so long as at least 10% of the signers voted in the last general election), and only those in the proposed transfer area would be allowed to vote.

 

Two territory transfer petitions were filed in time for the 2020 Primary Election and both would impact the Plain Local School District in Stark County. One petition was filed by a group of eight homeowners located on a cul-de-sac in the Plain District. They have petitioned for their properties to be transferred to North Canton City Schools. However, the first petition filed was by a small group of residents of the Village of Hills and Dales. These petitioners have requested that their territory be transferred from Plain Local school district to the Jackson Local school district. Plain Local, which stands to lose over $600,000 as a result of the territory transfer, has filed suit in a federal court to block the action on the basis that the new process denies them due process and also that it could increase segregation and undermine students’ rights to an equal education.

 

The fact that the residents of Hills and Dales were the first to exercise their rights under the new law should be no surprise as the State Board of Education blocked a previous attempt by more than 100 Hills and Dales residents to transfer from Plain Local to Jackson Local in 2005. This decision was later upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court. More recently, Hills and Dales village council minutes from February 2018 record the village’s desire for an alternative to the existing territory transfer process.

 

Finally, the newly enacted law could have a much larger impact statewide. There are 1309 townships in Ohio with a 2010 collective population of almost 5.7 million people – nearly half the state. Furthermore, according to Policy Matters Ohio, over 500 school districts in Ohio share a township with another district, which would make them eligible for the new transfer process. In fact, it has been reported that twelve different petitions have been filed by residents wishing to transfer from the Bowling Green City School District in Wood County.

 

Based on the above description, it would be difficult to find another piece of legislation passed in Ohio in recent memory as undemocratic as the new territory transfer provision. A Federal Court decision notwithstanding, the only real solution to a law which enables a small minority of voters to unilaterally choose their school district in contradiction to more than 60 years of legally established territory transfer practice is to repeal it. Recognizing the severity of this precedent, the Ohio House recently amended Senate Bill (SB) 89 to place a sunset provision on the new territory transfer law. The sunset provision would effectively repeal the new territory transfer provision on September 1, 2020. However, SB 89 was also tied to the EdChoice voucher debate, and differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill had not been resolved when the legislature recessed in late March in the midst of the Coronavirus health emergency.

 

Even if SB 89 were passed, the September 1 date still allows those interested in filing petitions for transfer the opportunity to meet the deadlines necessary to be on the November 2020 ballot. Without legislative action, currently, the only other prospect for eliminating this territory transfer provision lies with the fate of the Plain Local federal court case.