The Clark County auditor must continue to assess taxes resulting from a 2.2 mill bond levy approved in 2013 to upgrade Springfield City Schools, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled today.

In a unanimous per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court found County Auditor Hillary Hamilton had no authority to stop placing the 2.2mill levy on the tax list so the county treasurer could collect taxes. Hamilton argued that collection of a levy could not exceed 12 years, and the last year to impose the tax was for tax year 2024, which is paid in 2025.

Voters approved the bond issuance and tax increase in May 2013 to pay for school facilities, enhanced technology, building security, and school buses.  The school district told the Court that if Hamilton halted collection, it would need to find more than $6 million from other sources to pay back the bond debt. The school is seeking to collect payments through 2031.

The Court found the Springfield City Schools Board of Education had the discretion under R.C. Chapter 133 to issue the bonds up to six years after passage of a levy. The district split a $13.995 million bond issue into two series, one starting after voters approved the issuance in May 2013 and the other in November 2019.  

Each year, the school board must pass legislation directing the auditor to collect the property tax to pay the bonds, and the board directed the auditor to collect the money in 2026. The Court ruled the act is a ministerial one by the auditor, and Hamilton had no authority to not abide by the board’s request to assess district taxpayers.

Auditor Questions District’s Billing Authority
The May 2013 bond issue instructed voters that its facility bonds will be “repaid annually over a maximum of 12 years.” Voters were informed that the 2.2 mill levy would increase property taxes by 22 cents for each $100 of property value.

Once a bond levy is approved, R.C. 133.18 does not require all the bonds to be issued at once, the per curiam opinion stated. A taxing authority has roughly six years after the passage date to issue bonds. Springfield schools issued its first series of bonds, seeking $5.88 million, in September 2013. The collection of those bonds began in 2014. The final date to collect the 2013 bonds is December 2026, the school district maintained.

Through 2018, the district passed legislation to certify to the auditor the amount to collect to pay the debt, which the auditor then, in turn, placed on real property within the district.

In November 2019, the district issued its second set of bonds, seeking $8.11 million, with a maximum collection date through 2031. The district continued to certify to the auditor the amounts to collect, and the auditor approved the collections through tax year 2023. In 2023, the prior county auditor told the district that the bond levy could only be collected for 12 years, which ended in 2024 and would be collected for the last time in 2025.

When Hamilton assumed the office, she confirmed that she would not place the property on the tax list for 2025 or on the duplicate list given to the county treasurer to collect in 2026.

District Seeks Court Order To Continue Payment
The school district sought a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court in October 2024. It asked the Court to require the auditor to continue to collect the bond levy funds through 2031 when the last debt payment is due.

The Court noted there is no dispute that voters approved the levy in 2013 to borrow $13.995 million and that it would be repaid by collecting property taxes. The district notes that under R.C. 133.18(H), the auditor must place the levy on the tax list for collection to repay the outstanding debt if the school board passes legislation authorizing collection.

The Court found the board made the request to have money collected in 2026, and the auditor has a duty to place the taxes on real property to collect in 2026. The auditor argued there is only one 12-year-period during which property tax may be levied to collect the bonds, and that time expired in 2024.  According to the auditor, the 12-year period began to run when the school district issued the first series of bonds in 2013. 

The Court’s opinion stated it did not need to resolve the interpretation of the law “because the auditor does not have the authority to refuse to place the bond levy on the tax list and duplicate for tax year 2025 (collection year 2026).”

The Court pointed to its 2008 State ex rel. Lorain v. Stewart decision, in which the city of Lorain attempted to grant property tax exemptions for 355 properties. The county auditor refused to issue the exemptions, determining that the exemptions for those properties were improper.

The Court ruled in Stewart that the auditor had a duty to grant the exemptions if the properties were certified as exempt by the city. While Springfield’s school levy deals with different state statutes than the Lorain case, the same principles apply, the opinion stated.

“The auditor has not cited any statute that allows her to refuse to perform the ministerial duty of placing the tax levy on the tax list and duplicate based on her belief that the bond levy has expired,” the Court stated.

The Court noted it agreed to grant the school's request to have the money collected in 2026. It stated it cannot order the auditor at this time to collect the taxes for future years because the auditor’s duty to impose the tax is triggered only when the school district passes legislation in future years requesting the collection.

2024-1425. State ex rel. Springfield City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. Hamilton, Slip Opinion No. 2025-Ohio-4427.

Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion, but only for noteworthy cases. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of court opinions. The full text of this and other court opinions are available online.