Legislative News

Gov. John Kasich‘s latest attempt to consolidate several boards and commissions – a plan the administration hopes to see enacted in the lame duck session – excludes the Architect’s Registration Board, but is triggering consternation among members of the medical professional groups that would be consolidated.

Past attempts to cull the number of boards have triggered extensive turf battles among the various groups, most of which successfully convinced lawmakers that their individual oversight panels serve the public and their professions well. But the new proposal to combine 16 medical related boards into eight could be the most ambitious to date and will likely reenergize the constituencies and result in significant pushback in upcoming legislative hearings.

The latest consolidation effort comes as lawmakers wrap up their “Sunset Review” process of deciding which boards and commissions are no longer necessary. 

Introduced earlier this week by Sen. Bill Seitz (R-Cincinnati) and Rep. Sarah LaTourette (R-Bainbridge Twp.), the proposal ( SB 366,  HB 617) follows last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found North Carolina’s Dental Board violated antitrust laws by having dentists in effect regulate themselves by having members of the profession serve on the panel.

“With the need to address the Supreme Court case ruling, the General Assembly currently going through the Sunset Review process, and considering our administration’s ongoing efforts to reform health care, it is important to look at these things in an interrelated way,” said administration spokesman Tom Hoyt, of the Department of Administrative Services. “We applaud Senator Seitz, as well as Representative LaTourette, for taking on this effort and we look forward to working with them to get this to the governor’s desk.”

Sen. Seitz said his main aim in sponsoring the bill was to deal with the antitrust issue and he agreed to include the board consolidations after discussing the issue with the administration.

The lawmaker, who along with cosponsor Sen. John Eklund (R-Chardon) is an anti-trust lawyer, said it was important to address the Supreme Court case so people would be willing to serve on the panels.

“If you face the prospect of antitrust liability, which could be substantial and expensive, you are going to say, ‘No thank you, I’m not going to serve my profession,'” he said.

As for the “admittedly contentious and thorny issue of board consolidation,” Sen. Seitz said the proposal was crafted after much thought and discussion and avoids involving some of the state’s largest regulatory panels.  He said the groupings “conceptually make sense” and pointed to consolidations of state agencies, such as Mental Health and Addiction Services, as examples of how such mergers could work.

The administration distributed a memorandum on its plan to the boards and their constituencies, and many are expected to oppose it. Their arguments harken to past debates over proposed consolidations, which include concerns over lack of sufficient oversight, sufficient representation on the panels, public safety and depleted knowledge of the various professions.

The new structure would retain the Chiropractic, Dental and Nursing boards in their current form and condense others into the following:

·         State Medical Board of Ohio: Ohio Board of Dietetics, Ohio Respiratory Care Board, Medical Board.

·         Ohio Board of Pharmacy: Home Medical Equipment Facility Licensing, Pharmacy Board.

·         Physical Health Services Board: Ohio Occupational Therapy, Physical Therapy and Athletic Trainers Board, State Board of Orthotics, Prosthetics and Pedorthics.

·         Behavioral Health Professionals Board: Ohio Counselor, Social Worker and Marriage and Family Therapist Board, Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board, Ohio State Board of Psychology.

·         Vision and Hearing Professionals Board: Ohio Board of Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology, Ohio State Board of Optometry, Ohio Optical Dispensers Board, Hearing Aid Dealers and Fitters Licensing Board.

The representatives of other boards said they did not have a problem with the component of the proposal that directly addresses the court case.

Under that change, DAS would be involved in a third-party review process that “would be triggered when a board has the potential to violate state or federal antitrust law,” according to the administration’s fact sheet. “The addition of this review process is aimed squarely at shielding boards from potential legal action and specifically designed to prevent delays in important decisions made by the boards.”

On November 8, 2016, Ohio voters cast ballots in the 2016 general election. Federal offices — including President, U.S. Senate and Ohio Supreme Court — were all on the ballot, as were seats in the Ohio General Assembly. Many counties in Ohio and around the country reported record-breaking early voter turnout, adding to the historic nature of this election.

Presidential 
After quite an unusual election cycle, Donald J. Trump and his running mate Mike Pence clinched the presidential race after claiming many of the country’s swing states, including Ohio, which was won by over 400,000 votes. In a year with record high absentee ballots, the Trump/Pence campaign carried counties that haven’t been won by Republicans since the 1920s. President-elect Trump won 52.05 percent of the Ohio vote and Hillary Clinton won 43.51 percent of the vote. 

U.S. Senate
Incumbent Senator Rob Portman (R) prevailed over former Governor Ted Strickland (D) in the race for U.S. Senate in Ohio, winning 58.32 percent to 36.92 percent. Senator Portman took a significant lead in the polls over Strickland in the weeks leading up to the election. Portman and Strickland also faced Joseph DeMare of the Green Party and Thomas William Connors and Scott Rupert of the Independent Party. Each received 1.62 percent, 1.72 percent and 1.43 percent of the vote, respectively. Senator Portman has held Ohio’s Senate seat since 2011.

U.S. House of Representatives 
Republicans retained control of the U.S. House of Representatives. Ohio U.S. Representatives Marcia Fudge (D), Marcy Kaptur (D), Pat Tiberi (R), Mike Turner (R), David Joyce (R), Tim Ryan (D), Steve Stivers (R) and Jim Renacci (R) all won re-election. Steve Chabot (R), Brad Wenstrup (R), Joyce Beatty (D), Jim Jordan (R), Bob Latta (R), Bob Gibbs (R), and Warren Davidson (R) were also successful.

Ohio House and Senate: Republican Majority
In the Ohio House, the Republican majority increased to 66 seats, up 1 from the current 65. This is the single largest Republican majority in the history of the Ohio legislature. Similarly, in the Ohio Senate, with Frank Hoagland’s victory over incumbent Lou Gentile, the Ohio Senate majority, in the upcoming 132nd General Assembly, will be at 24 Republican seats — also the largest Republican majority in the history of the Ohio Senate. These are historic margins within the 2017-2018

Ohio Supreme Court
Judge Pat DeWine (R) of the 1st District Court of Appeals in Cincinnati prevailed over Judge Cynthia Rice (D) of the 11th District Court of Appeals in Northwest Ohio to fill Justice Paul Pfeifer’s (R) seat on the Ohio Supreme Court bench. (Justice Pfeifer was barred from seeking another term due to his age.) Judge DeWine, the son of former U.S. Senator and current Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine, came away with the win, obtaining 56.42 percent of the votes.

Additionally, Judge Pat Fischer (R) of the 1st District Court of Appeals in Cincinnati is currently leading by a narrow 26,000 vote margin over Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge John O’Donnell for a seat on the Ohio Supreme Court bench. Judge Fischer received 50.31 percent of the votes to fill Justice Judith Lanzinger’s (R) seat. (Lanzinger must also retire due to Ohio’s age requirement.)  While some media outlets have called the race for Fischer, there are still thousands of uncounted absentee and provisional ballots to be verified and possibly counted in late November, but it is too soon to know if those outstanding ballots will affect Judge Fischer’s apparent victory in this very close Ohio Supreme Court campaign. 

Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor was uncontested in her bid for re-election.

Pre-election, the court was dominated by Republicans 6-1. With the election of Judges DeWine, Fischer and O’Connor, this will remain the same.  

Ohio should beef up reporting requirements for the historic preservation tax credits and give further thought to converting the credit to a grant program, the 2020 Tax Policy Study Committee concluded in a report approved October 31. 

The report cites concerns it’s heard about too much credit money going toward “business professional fees” and not actual rehabilitation projects, noting a grant program could help address that concern. 

Other recommendations include the following: 

– “Further enhancements” to the project tracking requirement enacted earlier this year in HB233 (Schuring) to allow the state to estimate preservation credit projects’ effects on revenue forecasts. 

– Requiring applicants to show they’ll move forward with a project if awarded a credit, and setting a “reasonable period” in which the project must begin to avoid expiration of the credit award. “This will minimize projects in the queue and will provide better tracking of the credits.” 

– Consideration of a mechanism to aid in budget deliberations by showing the total allowable amount of credits that can be authorized during a biennium, estimates of credits that will be claimed each fiscal year of a biennium, and estimates of credits that have been authorized but will remain outstanding at the end of a biennium. “The intent of such a provision would be to clearly depict an estimate of the state revenues that will be directly foregone during the upcoming biennial budget and future biennia.” 

The commission voted to adopt the report with one change from the initial draft, to emphasize that any conversion to a grant program should affect only future tax credits, without disrupting existing credits.

The biennial budget, HB64 (R. Smith), required the commission to issue a report on the preservation credit and the possibility of converting it to a grant program. The commission is also required to study possible reforms to the severance tax, as well as the concept of converting Ohio’s progressive income tax to a flat-rate tax.

The full report is here.

A controversial measure banning local hiring quotas that took effect earlier this year is unconstitutional, according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday by the City of Cleveland.

The lawsuit, filed in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, alleges that the law (HB 180) is a violation of home rule authority granted by the state’s constitution.

The law “violates the Ohio Constitution by purporting to preempt and deprive the city of its powers of local self-government established by Article XVIII, Section 3 of the Ohio Constitution, Ohio Home Rule Amendment,” the complaint reads.

Signed into law by Gov. John Kasich on May 31, it is set to take effect Aug. 31.

If it does, the city argues, it would override a 2003 ordinance that requires 20% of taxpayer-funded construction hours to go to city residents. The law also requires that 4% of those hours are worked by low-income residents.

Since 2013, according to the lawsuit, the law has allowed city residents to work 897,870 hours on taxpayer funded construction projects, generating more than $34 million in wages. More than 100,000 were worked by low-income city residents.

Those numbers, the city claims, demonstrate the irreparable harm that would beset the city if the law is allowed to take effect.

“There is no way the loss of such hours would be compensated in the future. The economic benefit to the city and the direct loss by Cleveland citizens would be irreparable,” the lawsuit reads. “The city law was put into place because the city council had determined that citizens of Cleveland were not getting the opportunities associated with public construction contracts funded by the city.”

Sponsoring Rep. Ron Maag (R-Lebanon) said the local hiring quotas build “walls against employment.” 

“When an Ohio governmental entity implements a residency restriction, that restriction cannot be applied to out-of-state employees of any contractor, or out-of-state contractors,” he said during sponsor testimony. “Ironically, this gives an unintended competitive advantage to out-of-state contractors.”

He also pointed to a 2009 Ohio Supreme Court Case – Lima v. State – that found cities cannot require their employees to reside in the city of employment as justification for the bill.

Democrats, however, argued throughout the process that it would strip local governments of home-rule powers and sought to insert language that would have allowed for 5% local hiring quotas. However, that proposal was rejected.

The bill was approved in a party-line vote in the Senate, where it was spared a provision inserted into companion legislation (SB 152) in the House that Democrats described as “Senate Bill 5-lite.” (See 

On the House floor, Democrats sought to add language that would have allowed local hiring quotas of up to 5%. However, the proposal was rejected.

Rep. Alicia Reece (D-Cincinnati) welcomed the suit on Tuesday, saying the Ohio constitution is intended, in part, “to protect the freedom of local decision making in communities across Ohio.”

“Local hiring standards have been an effective tool to push back against the high unemployment that plagues too many minority communities in our urban cores,” she added. “For the state to take away tools that increase broad-based economic opportunity and increase our skilled workforce is unconscionable, but I applaud Cleveland leaders for fighting back against what is effectively taxation without participation.”

The 2020 Tax Study Commission took more testimony June 20 on the benefits resulting from Ohio’s Historic Preservation Tax Credit.  Deputy Tax Commissioner Marjorie Kruse and Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Amanda Terrell spoke on the historic preservation tax credit, with Kruse summarizing the department’s role in processing, verifying, tracking, and refunding the credit. Terrell said the effectiveness of the program is seen in the number of reapplications for the credit – up to three and four times.

“What that says to us is that many of these owners need the credit in order to make the financing work — otherwise, would they really sit on a property for months or years longer than necessary?” she said.

Arguing for the success of the program, Terrell said Ohio ranked third nationally in FFY15 for the number of certified historic buildings seeking the federal credit; no. 2 for the number of completed projects reviewed and forwarded to the National Park Service; and no. 1 for the number of applications for buildings preparing to begin rehabilitation and construction.

After the hearing, Sen. Bob Peterson (R-Sabina), chairman of the commission, said the next meeting would be held in the last week of July.

Governor John Kasich has signed HB 233 which authorizes municipal corporations to create downtown redevelopment districts and innovation districts for the purposes of promoting the rehabilitation of historic buildings, creating jobs, encouraging economic development in commercial and mixed-use areas, and supporting grants and loans to technology-oriented and other businesses.

The state’s Capital Construction Bill, SB 310, passed the House May 4 (89-1) and now goes to the Governor’s desk for his expected signature.  CLICK HERE for a summary of included projects.

An attempt to ban the use of project labor agreements in certain construction projects hit a wall in the Senate May 4, when members overwhelmingly rejected House language that would have put the new limits in place.

Senators voted 25-8 to reject the House amendments to legislation (SB 152) that also blocks public authorities from requiring a certain percentage of architects and workers from the geographic area of the project.

The Senate’s concurrence vote came shortly after the House voted 51-42 to advance the controversial plan following extensive debate.

The bill could now head to a conference committee. What appears more likely, however, is that members will opt to address the residency issue – sans PLA language – through companion legislation (HB 180) advanced by the Senate Government Oversight & Reform committee.

The General Assembly will likely act on residency requirements before summer break.