College Students and Lakewood Parents

[Dan OMalley]

Bridget, I must admit I don't check this site as frequently as you might assume I do, let alone every comment on every post. I wish I could. If you ever need a response quickly, the best way to reach me is via email (Daniel.omalley@lakewoodoh.net) or phone (440.552.7234).

As for your follow-up comments, again I am confident Lakewoood is complying with state law. Is Brunswick? I don't know. Your points are very well-taken and I am glad to look into the matter further. Happy St. Patrick's Day.

[Bridget Conant]

Oh good, then you can also wonder if Green is not complying with Ohio law, as well, since they offer college students credit, too.

http://www.cityofgreen.org/uploads/studentcreditform16.pdf

[mjkuhns]

This week's Observer has an item I wrote about this story (on page 4). I hope that it may help a few people realize, at little sooner than might have been the case, that they need to file a return this year.

Beyond that, I had a number of inquiries in progress at the deadline. Since then I have been in contact with the Ohio Society of CPAs. Their director of tax policy said that this issue is a difference of opinion, but his own opinion was quite firm that cities are free to keep exemptions like this. I anticipate some other expert opinions, and more comments from the city, hopefully this week.

Meanwhile I want to thank the others who have looked into this so extensively, particularly Mr. Klann and Ms. Conant. To a great extent, I have been simply following up their work and collating it.

[Bridget Conant]

Mjkuhns wrote:

Their director of tax policy said that this issue is a difference of opinion, but his own opinion was quite firm that cities are free to keep exemptions like this.

From what I understand, the general opinion is that cities are free to set tax policy (rates, exemptions, etc) as long as it does not directly conflict with the clearly specified instructions given by the state, e.g., on not taxing third party sick pay or taxing clergy. Again, the bill was mostly concerned about making it easier for a business to operate in multiple localities without having to keep track of differing dates and filing requirements.

I'd like to know who in our fair city made the call that this exemption was not in compliance and if they consulted with other cities that DID keep the exemption.

It seems rather cheap and petty to summarily drop the exemption, without notice. I'm quite sure the revenue they will now bring in from college students is not particularly large, certainly nowhere near what they lost from hospital workers, or even New York Life employees. Yet for a working student, that money they now have to turn over to the city was hard won and precious.

We like to think we are a "cool" city that attracts the younger crowd, and we desperately need them. So how does this reflect on the city? Wouldn't we look more "cool" if we had made the effort to keep the exemption and show that we value these young people?

[mjkuhns]

If you know a student who is affected by this (or if you are one), please contact me.

I have been assembling some more information on this, but I would really like to speak with people about their personal perspective as well.

Please message me through the forum, here, or e-mail mk@mattkuhns.com

Thanks!

[Bridget Conant]

Any update, Dan O'Malley?

What I'd really like to know is who was responsible for removing this from the new ordinance.

Was this decision unilaterally made by the law director, tax director, etc., or whoever was responsible for drafting the new ordinance, or was there discussion among a few people and/or council. It appears to me that not much, if any, council discussion took place.