|
|
|
Ohio Municipal League email:
Also please include a phone number and/or address for instances when we need
further contact with you. Please type
“OML Inquiry” in subject line so that we can identify e-mails picked up as spam. |
No. 11 December 8, 2006 PLEASE CIRCULATE THIS BULLETIN TO YOUR COUNCIL, DEPARTMENT HEADS & STAFF SENATE PASSES RED-LIGHT CAMERA BILL. A new version of the anti-red light camera bill (HB 56) passed out of the Ohio Senate this week by an 18-13 vote. Under provisions of the bill, local law enforcement would only be allowed to use photo-technology for red lights and schools zones, with flashing lights. The bill places the burden on local governments to prove who was driving the vehicle at the time of the offense and, then, bans the use of such devices to get a picture of who was driving the vehicle. Fortunately, time is short in the lame duck session, lest the Senate think further about the matter and ban photo ID’s for armed robbery, burglary and other offenses. The message is clear. While the General Assembly lectured local government on increasing their efficiency in providing services and exploring greater use of new technologies in discussing the Local Government Fund cuts last budget, they clearly don’t think we should explore efficiencies when it comes to public safety. Combined with the passage of a bill (HB 347) that would attempt to overrule all municipal ordinances on gun safety, a bill that saw the first veto override for the Taft administration this week, at least, in the House, you have to wonder if the twenty-five history of the General Assembly of reputedly being “tough on crime” is over. HB 56 is now subject to a House vote on whether to concur or ask for a conference committee on Senate amendments. Initially, the House sent an absolute ban on photo-technology, covered by a mere fig-leaf of legislative obfuscation, for all traffic safety measures. GOVERNOR’S VETO OVERRIDDEN IN THE HOUSE. This week, the General Assembly sprinted HB 347 to Governor Taft, who then sprinted to send the measure back to the General Assembly with a veto. A couple of hours later the Ohio House, by 71-21 vote, overrode the Governor’s veto. The governor’s veto was based on the fact that while HB 347 was supposed to clean up some of the provisions of Ohio’s Concealed Carry law, it mostly attempted to override the many local gun safety ordinances adopted by many cities and villages around the state. It was another victory for the “one-size-fits-all” government offered by the state of Ohio over the last eight years to Ohio’s cities and villages and another slap at the Ohio Constitution and Municipal Home Rule. The Senate is expected to try to put together the 20 votes needed to finish off the Governor’s veto next week. EMINENT DOMAIN MAY BE OFF THE TABLE THIS YEAR. We’ve had a number of indications this week that the lame duck session will not be the time for dealing with the issue of eminent domain, or any constitutional amendments related to that issue. If that is the case, we would expect statutory changes to the eminent domain law to be discussed sometime next year and any constitutional proposals related to the issue to be discussed heavily sometime before the deadline in August for November ballot issues. MINIMUM WAGE LEGISLATION. The Republicans, who opposed State Issue 2 which increases the minimum wage, have their bills (HB 690 and SB 401). And the Democrats, who supported State Issue 2, have theirs (SB 402). All the bills attempt to clarify what the voters voted for in November. The clarifications go to what records have to be kept and for how long, who is covered by the new wage rate and who can look at the wage records of employees. As you can imagine, the different bills take different views of what folks voted on in November. Despite all the pledges of fealty to bipartisanship that follows all elections, these bills, a bill on who can get an unbid contract in the new Strickland administration and a bill to change the administrative rule process are sizing up to be great partisan donnybrooks. Aside from their entertainment value, these fights will also define much of what the relationship will be between the new Democratic Governor and the new Republican General Assembly come January. The rest of that initial relationship will be defined by the reception of the Ohio Senate to the Governor’s new cabinet officers and the General Assembly’s thoughts about the Governor’s next budget. We will watch all of these events closely, get involved when need be and keep you informed as it all develops. OPEN RECORDS BILL. HB 9, which revamps Ohio’s Open Records Law, underwent some more changes this week in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The bill still includes some fines and attorneys’ fees for failure to disclose open records and training for elected officials or their designees on the law. However, the new bureaucracy for arbitrating open records cases is gone and the definition of what a public record is out. All of these changes and more were included in a substitute bill accepted by the committee this week. Additional amendments may be considered by the committee next week and a vote may be taken on the bill (see committee schedule). LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEES FOR THE WEEK OF DECEMBER 11, 2006. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12 Senate Insurance, Commerce & Labor, (Chr. Stivers, 466-5981), North Hearing Rm., 9:30 a.m. SB 401 MINIMUM WAGE (Stivers) To implement Section 34a, Article II, of the Constitution of the State of Ohio and to declare an emergency. (1st Hearing-Sponsor) WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 13 Senate Judiciary-Civil Justice, (Chr. Goodman, 466-8064), North Hearing Rm., 11 a.m. HB 9 PUBLIC RECORDS LAW (Oelslager) To revise the Public Records Law, to create the office of Public Access Counselor in the Court of Claims, to create a library records commission in each public library and a special taxing district records commission in each special taxing district, to allow a concealed carry licensee to prohibit the disclosure of the licensee's information to a journalist, to revise the records commissions laws, and to eliminate the provision that certain records made by a public accountant incident to an audit of a public office or private entity are not public records. (6th Hearing-All testimony-Possible amendments & vote) |
