In coming weeks and months, leaders of the 15 townships with 5,000 people or more in Mahoning and Trumbull counties likely will keep their eyeballs squarely peeled on the evolution of state House Bill 592.

That’s because that legislation, sponsored by state Rep. David Thomas, R-Jefferson, would open long-locked doors to those townships’ potential to evolve into much stronger local governments.

For decades, informal whispered talk of transforming weak township governments into much stronger city governments have been floated, particularly among such larger and urbanized communities as Boardman, Austintown, Liberty and Howland.

Such talk in the Mahoning Valley and elsewhere in the state quickly and inevitably sink, however, once it becomes painfully obvious that state law effectively and inescapably hogties township governments in their own low-power governing pens.

HB 592, if enacted, would loosen those ties and free those townships to alter their destiny if they so choose. As such, it merits bipartisan support and expeditious passage.

Our Valley representative’s legislation, which is also sponsored by state Rep. Adam Mathews, R-Lebanon, wisely would remove two major and longstanding barriers to legal incorporation for townships.

First, it would decrease the population threshold from 25,000 to 5,000 to enable townships to even consider incorporation. That makes eminently good sense considering that the state long has otherwise permitted communities of 5,000 people or more to become a legal city.

Second, and most importantly, it would eliminate the current inexplicable requirement that mandates any township petitioning to incorporate as a city to obtain the approval from all existing cities and villages within a 3-mile radius of the township. Since many municipalities profit from providing nearby townships with essential public services, mustering up such support would be slim to none.

As Thomas put it in his announcement of introduction of HB 592, “This legislation would make the decision of transforming a township into a municipality up to the voters of the township, not allowing that choice to be blocked by surrounding cities or villages.”

In addition, the legislation comes at a most propitious time as a statewide citizens’ campaign aims to place before voters this year a question to abolish all property taxes in the Buckeye State. If successful, townships would immediately fall into complete crisis mode.

That’s because Ohio townships are extremely reliant on property taxes, which serve as their primary, and often sole, major source of local revenue. Unlike cities, townships cannot levy income or sales taxes, making voter-approved property tax levies for police, fire, and road maintenance essential.

In Boardman, for example, property taxes account for approximately two-thirds of the township’s roughly $24 million annual budget. Losing that income clearly would cripple township operations and services.

Similarly in Howland, 85% of the township’s operating budget is reportedly reliant on property taxes. It’s not surprising then that Howland Trustee Matthew Vansuch has acknowledged that incorporation could be one possible response to any complete cutoff or sharp cutback in that principal source of revenue.

In a broader scope, the incorporation of large townships into cities could usher in a variety of advantages, such as enhanced local control, specialized services and diversified revenue streams. The “home rule” powers of cities could create superior zoning authority, stronger control over public utility rates and the ability to adopt specialized building codes. Cities also can often better regulate high-traffic areas and provide more specialized services than the rural-focused structure of township government.

Despite such attributes, however, don’t count on any mad dash among Ohio’s townships to reinvent themselves as cities should Thomas’ legislation become the law of the land. That’s because the process of incorporation would still remain time-consuming and tedious in spite of the barriers HB 592 would remove.

That process involves an extremely detailed petition on the plan that conforms with other state regulations on incorporation and with signatures of 20% of all voters in the last governor’s election in the township. Then public hearings must take place, maps approved and a special election scheduled in which a simple majority of yes votes would be needed to finalize incorporation.

Despite those many hoops through which townships would still need to jump, incorporation nonetheless should become one realistic tool for heavily populated townships to consider as an avenue for long-term financial stability and as an elixir for additional economic development and growth. But until the impractical and illogical obstacles are erased from state law governing incorporation, townships will remain tethered to the status quo — whether they like it or not.