Youngstown Daily Legal News

House accepts compromise bill for measure to limit special elections

KEITH ARNOLD
Special to the Legal News
Published: January 24, 2018

Lawmakers seated for the Government Accountability and Oversight Committee in the Ohio House of Representatives reckoned last week that some August special elections are acceptable - just not those that amount to a permanent tax levy.

The committee accepted the substitute bill for House Bill 342 that would permit tax and bond measures with durations of five years or fewer to be placed on August ballots, allowing for emergency or temporary tax levies.

Previously, HB 342 - championed by Republican Rep. Derek Merrin of Monclova - would have prohibited completely all tax and bond issues from August ballots.

"Tax and bond issues are major decisions that have a long-term impact," Merrin has said during previous testimony in support of his bill. "They should be voted on at regular elections - not special elections effectively selected to bypass the majority in a community."

Additionally, HB 342 would update ballot and election notice language dating back to 1939.

Back then, the Ohio Revised Code required the proposed millage expressed in terms of $100 of property valuation to help voters understand the fiscal impact of levies.

Noting that home values have changed, Merrin proposed millage expressed in terms of $100,000 of property value rather the antiquated requirement.

"This change will make it easier for voters to ascertain the true cost of levies relative to their homes," the lawmaker said.

During last week's hearing, committee members considered the Ohio Municipal League's testimony against passage of HB 342.

League Executive Director Kent Scarrett criticized the bill for eliminating a vital option for that state's villages and cities that find themselves cash strapped.

"It is also important to note that special election ballots provide a key opportunity to adequately educate voters on a tax levy," Scarrett said. "When a levy is the sole issue on the ballot, it is easier to inform voters as to what the levy would actually accomplish.

"In a general or primary election, levies are overshadowed by the names on the ballot and can mean voters are making an uninformed decision on an important local matter."

It appears the substitute bill would alleviate Scarrett's concern over ending short-term budgetary fixes.

"Time is of the essence for many municipalities struggling with revenue deficits due to cuts in the Local Government Fund and other dried-up streams of revenue," he said. "Municipalities needing cash flow to pay the bills and keep essential services going do not have time to wait for the next general or primary election.

"This could force municipalities to instead raise credits to keep the lights on."

Citing an overall savings to counties for limiting special elections to the primary and general elections, Union County Commissioner Gary Lee said HB 342 would benefit local government and the electorate.

"Currently, many tax related proposals may also appear on the special election ballot in August," Lee said. "Eliminating tax issues at special elections would result in savings for local governments, as the cost of placing a single issue before the voters in a special election is typically charged back to the taxing district that proposed the tax levy.

"These charge backs do not encompass the wear and tear on the voting machines."

He said limiting special elections to twice a year would allow for levy campaigns to be developed and better voter participation.

"We understand that placing issues before the voters in a special election in August may lead to reduced voter turnout, as voters do not expect to be going to the polls in August," Lee said.

HB 342, which won the support of 10 fellow House members who cosponsored the measure, was not scheduled a subsequent hearing at time of publication.

[Back]