Latest news with #JerryCirino
Yahoo
30-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Republicans say unclaimed funds used before without challenge amid Browns stadium debate
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — On Wednesday, state lawmakers passed the two-year state operating budget worth $60 billion, which included a way to give the state a little more money to play with, and the Cleveland Browns some financial help building a new stadium. Lawmakers wanted some sort of consistent revenue fund for current and future requests from other teams. Gov. Mike DeWine first suggested doubling the state's online sports gambling tax. Republicans quickly rejected that idea. Instead, Ohio lawmakers are hoping to tap into the state's unclaimed funds. An unclaimed fund is money that someone probably doesn't even know they have, being held by the state. It could be anything from a check never cashed to an account forgotten. People can claim their funds at any time through an official state website. Right now, that fund houses $3.7 billion. Now, lawmakers want to capitalize on what they call idle money and use it for a new 'Ohio Cultural and Sports Facility' fund. This all stemmed from the Cleveland Browns asking the state for $600 million to build a new stadium. Under this budget, $1 billion will be put into the fund: $600 million for the Cleveland Browns and $400 million to be used on other projects. 'There are at least a dozen times in the past when the state has taken money from the unclaimed funds and in some cases emergency situations,' Ohio Senate Finance Chair Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland) said. 'So, this is not the first time and we didn't recall any challenges to those occasions when that money was used.' 'We pulled levers that we pulled in the Great Recession to keep our budget stable, to make sure we didn't have massive layoffs, to make sure that our schools remained open and kids could get educated. That is how dire it was, that is the last time we raided unclaimed funds in this magnitude,' Ohio House Finance Ranking Member Bride Rose Sweeney (D-Westlake) said. The proposal, if signed into law by DeWine, is already facing a lawsuit. DannLaw plans to file class action lawsuit challenging the provision if it does take effect. 'The Ohio Supreme Court has been crystal clear: unclaimed funds are not state property — it's private property,' attorney and former state representative Jeffrey Crossman said. 'This case is about protecting Ohioans' constitutional rights and stopping the legislature from liquidating private property and turning it into a billionaire's building fund. Ohioans shouldn't have to race the clock to reclaim what's already theirs.' The governor must enact the budget by July 1, but he does have the ability to line item veto any provision within the spending bill. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Can they do that? Ohio Senators propose novel, if questionable, Browns stadium funding plan
Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, discussing the Senate's budget proposal alongside Senate President Rob McColley. (Photo by Nick Evans, Ohio Capital Journal.) Ohio Republicans largely agree that shelling out $600 million to fund a new Cleveland Browns stadium is a good idea. They just disagree on how to pay for it. Gov. Mike DeWine proposed increasing the taxes on gambling and Ohio House lawmakers favored issuing state bonds. State senators thought way outside the box. Every state oversees unclaimed funds — think old security deposits, uncashed checks, or even bank accounts. The state acts as a custodian for that money, holding it until the rightful owner comes forward to claim it. According to the Ohio Department of Commerce, state officials are sitting on $4.8 billion in unclaimed funds. State senators are now eyeing that money for stadium funding. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The Ohio Senate's budget, approved Wednesday, would redefine all unclaimed funds that passed into state custody prior to 2016 as 'abandoned.' That money would then 'escheat' — a legal term for transferring ownership — to the state. 'What this does is it takes idle money and puts it to work to create jobs, to create incremental taxes, and that's why we're so excited about this project,' Senate budget chief Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, said at a press conference introducing the idea earlier this month. Ohio officials would use a newly created fund, estimated at $1.7 billion, to put up the $600 million the Browns need while maintaining a nest egg for future sports and cultural facilities. The Browns would pay its share back through tax revenue generated by the project. The team would also put up $100 million in case that tax revenue falls short. Going forward, any unclaimed funds would move to the new stadium fund if no one claimed them within 10 years. Cirino emphasized companies often spend several years attempting to return funds before money ever gets transferred to the state's custody. Ohio Senate President Rob McColley added, 'If you look at the $600 million amount, I believe all of those are at least 18 years or older. So, they've been sitting in the fund for some time.' The alternatives, Cirino agued, aren't particularly attractive. Raising taxes, even on gambling, is a nonstarter in his caucus. And borrowing money, even if the team pays back every penny, would carry substantial costs. Over 25 years, those bonds would carry $400 million in debt servicing, Cirino said, 'and the debt service would be paid out of the general fund.' The plan's supporters are quick to emphasize the safeguards. Anyone whose property gets rolled over in that first sweep to the stadium fund will have a ten-year grace period — extending to January 1, 2036 — in which they can still claim their money. The Senate budget also appropriates an additional $1 million annually to support more outreach to the owners of unclaimed funds. 'Any property that belongs to anybody, rightfully and legitimately, we want them to get what they have coming to them,' Cirino said in an interview. 'And we're not suggesting anything to the contrary. We're just simply setting a time period here, that is, we think, reasonable.' In Ohio, the state Department of Commerce oversees unclaimed funds, but in many other states that's the state treasurer's job. And the National Association of State Treasurers is unequivocal about how unclaimed property programs should run. 'We actually have official policy stating that we believe that state unclaimed property programs should make these funds available to their owners in perpetuity,' NAST Executive Director Shaun Snyder explained. The group's policy statement raises concerns about potential legal challenges and emphasizes a state taking custody of unclaimed property isn't the same as taking ownership of it. At their heart, Snyder argued, unclaimed funds programs are built on trust. 'You get that trust by telling people, 'Look, if you lose your property, you will be able to claim it. We will keep it for you and protect it for you,'' he explained. 'When states decide to essentially add in a cut-off of some kind, that can undermine that process.' Snyder noted there are just four states with policies that escheat unclaimed funds to the state after a specific period of time. Two of them, Arizona and Indiana, wait much longer than Ohio proposes, only transferring funds to the state after 25 years. Hawaii and Rhode Island set the cut off at 10 years, but only for small amounts — less than $100 in Hawaii and less than $50 in Rhode Island. Like Snyder, the Urban Institute's Lucy Dadayan argued that 'redirecting these funds for public projects, even after a long dormancy period, risks undermining public trust and confidence in government.' She also raised doubts about the sustainability of the idea. If the stadium funding plan raises awareness, more people could come forward with claims and reduce the amount of money flowing to the stadium fund. 'Well, it's definitely outside-the-box,' University of Chicago Professor Justin Marlowe said of the proposal. Marlowe heads up the school's Center for Municipal Finance and explained he hasn't heard of any other state using unclaimed quite like Ohio is considering. One of the virtues of that approach, he said, is it provides the necessary upfront costs without raising taxes or borrowing a lot of money. 'I suppose that's a tradeoff that's worth making if you're willing to get over the conceptual leap of using unclaimed property to this effect,' he said. 'I get what they're trying to solve for, and this is definitely a creative way to solve for that, for better or for worse.' But Marlowe raised some notable concerns. His center runs a podcast, he said, and they've spoken with about 15 state treasurers. All of them have a story about reconnecting people with long-lost property. 'That's not a 10-year arc, that's a several decades long arc,' he said. 'And so, it does kind of raise that question of, is 10 years the right timeframe? Because no one's ever really done this, I don't think there's any right or wrong answer. That's kind of a policy choice, but it does seem short.' Marlowe added the systematic transfer of citizens' property raises legal complications that aren't easy to answer. The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from taking private property without 'just compensation.' Ohio's Constitution carries similar requirements and puts the onus on the state to show that taking was necessary and for public use. Additionally, the escheatment program could raise due process questions. 'I'm sure they can write the law in a way to insulate them from a lot of that, but at some level, these are not statutory questions. These are much broader, constitutional — almost philosophical — questions,' he said. 'Which might be why no one has done this to date, right?' In testimony submitted to the Ohio Senate Finance Committee, the City of Cleveland set aside questions about the source of the money and argued that the new Browns stadium would harm their lakefront redevelopment efforts. 'Public funds — whether from the General Revenue Fund or the unclaimed property fund — should be used to strengthen cities, not undermine them,' the city argued. Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne wasn't bashful about criticizing the unclaimed property idea though. 'This is not robbing Peter to pay Paul,' he argued. 'This is robbing Bob and Betty Buckeye to pay (Browns owners) Jimmy and Dee Haslam.' Cirino bristled at that characterization. 'That's a load of garbage, okay? We're not stealing any money from anybody,' he insisted. 'I found his comments about the Senate quite insulting as a matter of fact.' He noted lawmakers have dipped into unclaimed funds 'at least a dozen times previously.' A Legislative Service Commission memo shared with Ohio Capital Journal notes lawmakers have authorized $1.2 billion in cash transfers out of the fund and used it to capitalize the state's mortgage insurance and housing development funds. However, that money is subject to recall if it's needed to pay the rightful owners of unclaimed funds. The proposal got support from the Ohio Business Roundtable. In a letter to the Senate Finance Committee, the group's President and CEO Pat Tiberi argued it's a 'strategic and fiscally responsible approach' to funding venues. 'A statewide fund ensures Ohio is positioned to proactively support these capital-intensive projects as a means of regional growth and long-term economic competitiveness — not just for a single city or franchise, but for the benefit of all regions,' Tiberi wrote. 'Importantly,' he added, 'the Senate's proposal avoids placing new tax burdens on Ohioans, taking general revenue funds or increasing the state's debt obligations.' Like Cirino, Tiberi emphasized the plan would put 'idle' resources to more productive use. Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
County coroners' future as elected officials sees signs of life
Jun. 10—In a final tweak to its proposed two-year state operating budget, the Ohio Senate changed course on a provision that would have made all county coroners in Ohio appointed by county commissioners instead of elected by the public. The Tuesday amendment comes less than a week after the Senate indicated it would go along with the House's plan to do away with elected county coroners. Senate Finance Chair Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, said the change was a result of robust debate within the Senate's supermajority GOP caucus. "I think it came to a point of like, look: There wasn't a compelling enough reason represented to change the way it's currently done," Cirino told reporters Tuesday. The late change adds another item to a list of hundreds of differences between the House and Senate's version of the state's two year spending plan. Those changes will be sorted out in a so-called conference committee in coming weeks. The Ohio House argued that making coroners an appointed position was necessary to counteract a growing scarcity of qualified Ohioans who were interested in running for office. If the state removed the campaigning requirement, the logic goes, then more Ohioans might be interested in becoming coroner. But the House plan met staunch opposition from the Ohio Coroners Association, whose executive director David Corey told this outlet that the change was unnecessary. "Commissioners already have the authority to appoint a physician to be coroner if no one runs," Corey said. "So they already have this authority — so why subject this as a blanket on everyone?" Corey said the plan could create a dynamic where coroners are more beholden to the county commission than the voters of the county. The appointment plan, if implemented, could have repercussions for coroners in positions similar to longtime Montgomery County Coroner Kent Harshbarger, a Republican serving alongside a majority Democratic county commission. ------ For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It's free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening. Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
What's the future of state park funding? Ohio Senate uses fracking bonuses for bottom line
When Ohio Republicans pitched fracking in state parks in 2011, one of their selling points was a cash infusion for state parks. But a Senate change would put that money toward regular operations instead. That has some Ohioans who rely on those parks concerned about future funding. "We're very rural and we depend on the income that tourism generates for our local economy," said Shannon Wells, director of economic development for Morgan County, which has three state parks and two wildlife areas. "The reduction in funding could impact law enforcement, other staffing that the state parks find critical to operate." A spokesman for Senate Republicans said those fears are unfounded. Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, told Ohio Public Radio that fracking royalties 'don't belong to ODNR (Ohio Department of Natural Resources). They belong to the people of the state of Ohio.' In December 2024, Ohio approved oil and gas drilling under hundreds of acres of Salt Fork State Park. It was the first − and so far only − state park approved for fracking after state lawmakers kick-started the application process in December 2022. More:Get The Scoop!: Sign up for our weekly Ohio politics newsletter As part of that deal, West Virginia-based Infinity Natural Resources paid $59.7 million in lease bonuses. State law requires 30% of that money to go toward improvements to Salt Fork State Park. In March, Ohio doled out $9.6 million to replace a beach shelter house, build a new concession stand, resurface parking areas and make other repairs. The remaining money is put into a special fund for state parks. Rather than dole that money out, Senate Republicans' two-year budget would cut $35.3 million from Ohio Department of Natural Resources' budget and backfill that money with the signing bonuses, effectively flat-funding the department. Tracy Simons, Morgan County's executive director of tourism, wonders why lawmakers are relying on a pot of money from fracking bonuses that isn't guaranteed going forward. "People could lose their jobs. It's just a snowball effect." Simons said state parks are the lifeblood of tourism for smaller counties like hers. "It would be detrimental to our county as a whole," she said. "Many of our small businesses here rely on tourism and the dollars that it brings in." ODNR is reviewing a proposal, a spokesman said. The Ohio Senate is expected to pass the state budget soon. Then, lawmakers in the House and Senate will hash out differences before sending it to Gov. Mike DeWine. The deadline for a balanced budget is June 30. State government reporter Jessie Balmert can be reached at jbalmert@ or @jbalmert on X. This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Locals who rely on state parks tourism worry about Senate budget plan
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Ohio Senate GOP budget increases school funding, gives Browns $600M grant, creates flat tax
Senate President Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, speaks at the Ohio Senate Republican Budget Press Conference. Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, the chair of the Senate Finance Committee, stands in the background. Photo: Morgan Trau, WEWS The Ohio Senate has announced its version of the state budget, one that provides a slight increase in public school funding, gives a $600 million grant to the Cleveland Browns for their new stadium and creates a flat income tax of 2.75%. Senate President Rob McColley (R-Napoleon) and Finance Chair Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland) announced their proposed amendments to the state's biennial operating budget on Tuesday afternoon. House Bill 96, the number for the House's budget bill, passed in April. The senators increased the amount of money going to public schools compared to the House's proposal. The Senate budget gives public schools about $100 million more than the House. Although it follows most of the House's proposed budget – which only gives schools about $226 million for school funding, or $550 million total – the Senate changed the funding 'guarantee' amount. Right now, some districts have guarantees that a portion of their funding will not be reduced, even if their enrollment goes down. However, to be fully funded, based on statistics from the Fair School Funding Plan from 2021, schools would need an additional $666-800 million, compared to the $226 million given by the House. They also raised the House proposal's cap on districts' rainy day funds to 50%, instead of 30%. This would mean that the schools would have to refund anything above that back to the taxpayer in a method legislators want to use to provide property tax relief. The Senate's budget proposal still includes $600 million for a new Cleveland Browns stadium in Brook Park. However, the funding structure differs from what the Browns proposed and what the House approved earlier this year. The House proposed borrowing $600 million by issuing bonds and repaying the debt, with interest, over 25 years, at a cost of about $1 billion. The Senate is proposing a $600 million grant for the stadium using unclaimed funds. That money is property of Ohioans held by the state, things like forgotten bank accounts, rent or utility deposits or uncashed insurance policies. The Ohio Department of Commerce's website says the state is sitting on $4.8 billion in unclaimed funds. The Senate believes the state will more than recoup that investment through sales tax, income tax and commercial activity tax revenues from the 176-acre Brook Park stadium district. The budget also includes a 2.75% flat income tax. This mirrors a bill currently in the House, which would eliminate the separate brackets of the non-business income tax. People making more than $102,400 would have their taxes reduced from 3.5% to 3.125% in 2025 and then down to 2.75% in 2026. The lower bracket would stay at 2.75%. Now, the Senate and House leaders will enter a conference committee, a closed-door negotiation period to create a final budget. Once a decision is made, both chambers must pass the combined bill. If it passes through both sides, it will be sent to Gov. Mike DeWine for review. In the past, he issued dozens of line-item vetoes on operating budgets. Line-item vetoing is the ability for the governor to pick and choose which policies within a larger piece of legislation get to stay or must go. DeWine is adamantly against giving the bond package to the Browns, and we have asked repeatedly if he plans to veto it. He says he hopes it doesn't get to that point. The budget must be passed by the end of June. This is a developing story and will be updated. Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
