Fiscal Focus

Fiscal Focus: Higher Education

February 14, 2013 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Each Fiscal Focus will look at our vision for key areas of public investment in Ohio and provide insight into current budgetary trends for that sector. All Ohioans are impacted by our elected officials’ budget decisions. In 2013, a new two-year state budget will be crafted – this series will provide a comprehensive overview of the major questions and concerns for Ohio’s 2014-15 biennial budget.

Why the Public Should Invest
Higher education is critical for Ohio in developing the skills of tomorrow, inspiring new innovation, and developing an insightful and compassionate society. In addition to providing degrees and certifications, Ohio’s colleges foster diversity of thought. Through our colleges and universities, Ohio becomes an attractive place to learn, invest, and raise a family, because great public services lead to stronger communities.

The Current Reality
Ohio has an outstanding system of public colleges and universities. There are 13 public institutions that have four-year degree programs and 23 community and technical colleges. The state of Ohio administers its support for these programs through the Ohio board of Regents. Between fiscal year 2011 and FY 2012, the Ohio Board of Regents had a cut of over 9% for a total budget of $2.3 billion in 2012 and $2.4 billion in 2013.

Tuition increases have been a common trend for Ohio students. For example, The Ohio State University has increased tuition 7% over the past 2 years for an average tuition of $10,216 per academic year for in-state students. University of Miami tuition is $13,067 and Bowling Green is $10,393. Ohio’s community colleges saw an increase of 12% between the school year starting in 2008 and 2011.

To meet these rising costs, students are more reliant on state and federal aid programs. Prior to 2009, Ohio ranked 18^th for the availability of need based college aid, but as a result to cuts in state assistance programs Ohio now ranks 35^th. Neighboring states all rank better than Ohio. The state of Ohio has offered the Ohio College Opportunities Grant (OCOG) as a primary source of need based aid. OCOG was created in 2006 to replace previous grant programs for low and moderate-income students. In FY2008-09 the state provided $352 million for OCOG. After years of cuts, OCOG is currently funded at $160 million for FY 2012-13.

In 2011, the state adopted, the “Pell First” policy, which required OCOG funds to be given out only after Pell Grant distributions. The OCOG funds are distributed based on the unmet need of tuition for low-income students, and since the Pell Grant covers the cost of community college tuition, it eliminates these students from eligibility. However this eliminates need-based aid for living expenses, materials and other costs that college students incur. Adults, low-income individuals, and non-traditional students rely on the low cost, flexible schedules, and the accessibility of Ohio’s community colleges for their education. Research has recently shown that student debt from 2-year colleges has risen in Ohio as a result of this policy change.

The 2014-15 Budget
Governor Kasich introduced changes to the structure of higher education funding in November of 2012 after months of conversations with university presidents. These proposals are incorporated into his budget proposal released on Monday Feb. 4^th. These changes will be vetted and considered over the next few months as part of the budget process.

The changes focus on how the state will distribute funds to local colleges and universities. In the new formula there will be a focus on course enrollment and graduation compared to student enrollment at the institution. There will also be a formula that will regulate tuition increases based on state averages. While we will need the full budget and time to analyze many programs, OGOG at the same basic funding levels from the 2012-13 budget to the 14-15 budget.

In addition to the static funding level of OCOG, the proposed budget, does not remove the Pell Grant priority rule. With Pell Grants falling an average of $3,000-$5,400 short in financial need, college affordability will likely be a point of conversation in this upcoming budget debate. Many advocates hope to remove the Pell Grant Priority rule and increase OCOG funding. By making college more affordable, it will reduce debt on students leaving college and entering the workforce.

The overall funding levels for the Board of Regents remains static for higher education with a 0% increase in 2014 and a slight 2% increase in 2015. New investments by the state would have the potential to expand opportunities for students, reduce tuition and fees, and continue to provide an excellent system of public higher education that will provide diverse offerings for all Ohioans.

Speak Up!
If you would like to get involved as the state budget nears and our advocacy increases, please follow us on Facebook, Twitter, or sign up for our emails. Please read our past Fiscal Focus articles on K-12 education, state parks, , , or privatization.

If you’re interested in additional information on higher education in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, higher Ed

Fiscal Focus: Local Government

January 29, 2013 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
Our local governments provide the most direct services to us. We drive on local roads, walk on local sidewalks, and throw our trash in local trashcans picked up by local refuse collectors. Our parks are local, our fire fighters are local, and our social workers are local. Local government services are visible to us everyday and are essential to our daily lives.

Ohio has established a Local Government Fund and other revenue sharing mechanisms to make sure that our local counties, cities, and townships are able to provide these basic services for us. Revenue sharing has been viewed as a promise by the state to guarantee that local government will be able to provide services.

The Current Reality
When the Local Government Fund (LGF) was first established in 1934, it gave local governments 40% of all revenue generated by the newly enacted sales tax. Over the years, the LGF was scaled to be a percentage of overall revenues collected by the state. In July 2001, the state froze funding for the LGF at $821 million. This policy cost the LGF over $600 million in lost revenue. During the recession of 2008, Ohio revenues decreased and the LGF was cut another $177 million down to $641 million in fiscal year 2010 but increased spending slightly in FY2011 to $694 million. For 2012-13, the state cut the LGF by $504 million compared to the previous budget. This left the local government fund 50% of what it was in 2011 and well below where it needs to be to ensure basic services for the common good are provided for all Ohio’s local communities.

In addition to the Local Government Fund, the state has greatly modified other revenue sharing with local governments. The state passed two major tax changes that impacted how local communities could tax local property. First, in 2001, the state modified how property taxes would be assessed on utilities. Then in 2005, the state eliminated the tangible personal property (TPP) tax. The state knew that these changes would have a negative impact on the revenues that local government could collect through property taxes. To assist the local government entities, they created revenue sharing streams to help supplement the lost revenue. In the last budget tax reimbursements were reduced $582 million over the previous budget cycle.

The previous legislature passed legislation that eliminates the estate tax beginning in 2013. 80% of the estate tax went to the county of the decedent and distributed accordingly. For some counties, they relied upon millions of dollars a year from this funding source. While varying year to year, this revenue source brought in over $300 million in 2011 for local government.

In the most recent budget, Ohio communities have lost $504 million from the LGF, $582 million from reimbursements for over $1.08 billion worth of cuts. Now local communities will also deal with an additional cut of over $300 million a year from the loss of the estate tax.

The 2014-15 Budget
As we prepare for the next budget, we need to remember that there is a better way than a budget filled with cuts. Through effective advocacy, we can help legislators know the value of state and local government working together to fund and provide great public services. Advocates across Ohio are hopeful that the LGF will not be cut any further, but we cannot allow the status quo to become the new normal. It is time to restore great public services that lead to stronger communities.

After the last budget, advocates expected the LGF to be completely phased-out in this budget. However, over the course of the past two years consistent advocacy from struggling communities gives us hope that the LGF will not be eliminated in the Governor’s budget proposal.

Another issue of concern to local governments is the taxation of property. First we have the changes to utility taxation and the elimination of the TPP that have cost local communities revenue. In addition to the cuts at the state level, local property values have not risen back to pre-recession levels. Local governments are heavily reliant on property taxes to fund basic services, and the state has the capacity to fill in the budget holes of many communities using other revenue streams, such as the income tax.

If you’re interested in additional information on funding of local government or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, local

Fiscal Focus: Medicaid Expansion

January 17, 2013 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
When people have adequate health insurance coverage, they can receive preventative care, treat illness early on, and are more productive individuals in life and work. We should strive for all Ohioans to have health care that meets their needs and let them live to their full potential. Individuals without insurance utilize emergency rooms for primary care, where costs for care of the uninsured are then passed on to all Ohioans. A healthy society is happier and more productive, and a strong health care system can reduce costs for everyone.

The Current Reality
The Affordable Care Act (ACA), signed by President Obama in 2010, triggered the most significant changes to the health care system in the United States in decades. One major provision of the ACA leads to a discussion in Ohio (and all 50 states) about Medicaid Expansion. But, here are the basics on Medicaid today—pre-ACA implementation.

Medicaid is a state program that provides health coverage to low income individuals. In Ohio, around 64% of the funding comes from the federal government and 36% comes from the state. If the Ohio legislature decides to scale back funding, it reduces the federal match as well.

In 2010, approximately 2.2 million Ohioans were insured through Medicaid. Between 2009 and 2011, Ohioans who were covered by private insurance dropped from 66% to 57%. In 2011, more than 1.5 million Ohioans were uninsured.

Medicaid conversations invite much debate and interest due to the size of the program. Medicaid alone represents 4% of the Ohio economy. About 30% of the state budget is dedicated to this one program. Almost 70% of Medicaid spending is directed towards the disabled and seniors. The remainder is spent on families with children who represent a larger number of individuals served but are less costly. Because of the changing economic realities and policy decisions that have benefited the wealthy, we continue to see the number of poor and uninsured Ohioans at an alarming rate.

Currently, Medicaid eligibility is based on where a person falls on the ‘federal poverty line’ (FPL) and one additional characteristic. Eligibility exists for disabled workers up to 250% of the FPL, children and pregnant women up to 200% of the FPL, parents up to 90% of the FPL, and the disabled up to 64% of the FPL. Childless adults without a disability are not currently eligible for Medicaid.

The 2014-15 Budget
On January 15, 2013, released a non-partisan study of the impact of Medicaid expansion in Ohio. Medicaid expansion will be hotly debated based on the sheer amount of dollars tied to the program, moral and ethical calls to care for the sick, political ambitions and ideology, and philosophical differences about the proper size and role of government. The ACA allows states to expand Medicaid beginning in 2014 to cover the disabled, parents, and childless adults who fall beneath 138% of the FPL. In 2012, 138% of the poverty line for a family of 4 was $31,809.

The HPIO study estimates this expansion of Medicaid will encompass about 456,000 people. Between 2014-2017, the federal government will pay 100% of the expansion, and then they will slowly scale back until 2020 where the cost share will be 90/10 split between the federal government and Ohio. It is important to remember that other aspects of the ACA will take effect regardless of Medicaid Expansion in Ohio, such as the health insurance exchanges and the individual requirement.

In addition to providing more health care services to more people, Medicaid Expansion will be a financial gain for the state. There will be massive federal investment of $5 billion (over 10 years) in Ohio for healthcare. This will create jobs in the healthcare industry, increasing sales tax revenues and income tax revenues at the state and local levels.

Medicaid expansion will also generate savings in the state budget and free up resources for restoring and expanding services. Over 10 years, it is estimated the state will save $273 million on prison-related health expenses and $389 million on mental health services. There are other areas of savings as well such as cancer screenings.

In 2022, once the federal-state share has settled into its 90/10 cost sharing, Ohio will receive $610 million in new revenue and cost savings and have to spend $609 million for our 10% match. Unlike many policy debates, where there are a variety of options that can be chosen, Ohio policymakers have two options: Yes or No.

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, healthcare

Fiscal Focus: The Arts

January 10, 2013 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
The aim of art is to represent not the outward appearance of things, but their inward significance.
–Aristotle

Art reflects who we are as a community. In addition to the intrinsic value of the art, we can quantify the gains by realizing that the arts create 231,000 Ohio jobs and bring more than $25 billion to the states’ economy. Studies consistently show how a strong arts program in a school leads to better student performance in other subjects. As we look at the world in which we live, we want to see, hear, and feel beauty around us. This is why businesses and individuals appreciate communities where the arts are strong.

The Current Reality
The Ohio legislature established the Ohio Arts Council (OAC) over 45 years ago to oversee public investments in art. In Ohio, the state investment creates further private investment. For every $1 of state money, private donors contribute $52. Studies have consistently shown that when the state cuts its investment, so do private individuals.

The OAC filters 82% of its resources out as grants to community groups, schools, organizations, and individuals. In times of economic uncertainty, investments into the arts are often the first things cut. We see this on the local level when schools cut back on art and music programs, and the state often acts in the same way.

In the FY 2010-11, significantly lower revenue from the 2005 tax overhaul coupled with the economic recession led to cuts to the OAC by 47%. This left the OAC with a 2-year budget of approximately $14.2 million. In Governor Kasich’s proposal for the 2012-13 budget, Governor Kasich proposed cutting an additional 19.5% to the OAC from the General Revenue Fund. However, this did not occur and instead, Ohio saw a funding increase to $17.2 billion. This increase in spending is notable because many other states were continuing to slash their public investments in art.

The 2014-15 Budget
Prior to the cuts to our revenue system and the economic downturn, Ohio invested over $20 billion in a biennium towards the arts. While the last budget made steps towards getting us back on track, we need to continue this effort.

As we learned in the last budget, a 19.5% cut can be turned into a budget increase when dedicated legislators hear from dedicated advocates on what these cuts mean. The governor has asked each state agency for budgets at 100% and 90% of current funding levels. Maintaining funding at the $17.2 billion level, factoring in inflation, is effectively a cut. Advocates will need to let their legislators know that flat line funding is unacceptable while Ohio is still recovering from the 2008-2009 recession. We need to get Ohio back on track by continuing to invest in the public services that make our communities stronger.

Also affecting the arts, as part of the upcoming budget season, Ohio will likely be presented with a new education funding formula. Many of the OAC grants are to schools and organizations that have strong collaborations with schools. The school funding formula could impact arts funding by requiring more OAC funds to be directed at schools to maintain current services and investments. The new funding formula could also impact the arts if some subjects are more weighted for funding than others. A well-rounded education needs to support strong investments in the arts for our students and community.

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, Humanities

Fiscal Focus: Transportation

January 3, 2013 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
Like 90% of Americans traveling this holiday season, my family and I utilized the interstate highways to visit family and friends. Our federally integrated network of highways, airports, canals and rail lines allow individuals to travel for the holidays, businesses to cheaply transport goods, and first responders to quickly respond to emergencies. Through strong state and federal collaboration, transportation infrastructure serves to connect all of us.

The Current Reality
The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) oversees infrastructure in the state of Ohio. In addition to our roads, ODOT oversees 166 public use airports and oversees Ohio’s rail lines through the Ohio Rail Commission.

The primary funding for transportation infrastructure and maintenance in the country comes from federal and state gas taxes. The federal governmenthas a gas tax of 18 cents and Ohio has a 28-cent gas tax. The majority of the Ohio tax goes to ODOT—14.9 cents—and the rest is divided between counties, cities, townships, highway patrol, other state agencies, public works, and debt services to fund infrastructure.

The ODOT budget in FY 2012 was $2.70 billion and $2.85 billion in FY 2013. However, this is down from $3.23 billion in FY 2007, a cut of 12% over five years. As part of the FY 2007 budget, ODOT allocated $838 million towards major new projects, compared to the current budget that has less than $100 million allocated for new projects.

We have already seen the negative impact of less investment in transportation. ODOT has delayed 34 major projects and has reduced staff by 400 people since 2011. Two of the most notable delayed projects are the I-70/I-71 split project in Columbus and inner-belt work in Cleveland. In addition, the Brent Spence Bridge in Cincinnati will likely be funded using tolls instead of state investment.

As our transportation needs change, Ohio needs to adapt. An opportunity was missed when the federal government offered Ohio $400 million through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to fund high-speed rail service connecting Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati (the “3-C rail project”). Unfortunately, Governor Kasich chose not to accept this funding. Local communities continue to explore non-automobile options but find it difficult with decreased state support.

The 2014-15 Budget
In the 2014-15 budget, potential changes related to the turnpike – in addition to questions about funding for major infrastructure needs – will be important. Following a study, the Governor has proposed the issuance of $1.5 billion in bonds leveraged on the turnpike. This money will be borrowed now and paid back in the future by revenues generated by the turnpike. While the specifics are still being discussed, some have expressed concerns of toll increases and the diversion of revenue from the counties around the turnpike. The governor’s proposal will need legislative approval.

Revenue streams must remain up-to-date to reflect a 21^st century Ohio economy. The gas tax is seen as a barrier to transportation funding and investments, because cars are becoming more fuel-efficient. It may be worth considering if this tax is an appropriate and adequate mechanism to fund infrastructure investments. We need to have open conversation of what transportation infrastructure will need to be in the 21^st century for all of Ohio’s individuals and businesses.

It is also worth noting that as the oil and gas boom continues in Ohio, transportation infrastructure will be in drastic need of repair, expansion, and maintenance as a result of heavy truck use. Local communities will need state assistance in maintaining these roads and expanding some routes to handle the increased industrial activity. This is one potential use of an increased severance tax on oil and gas drilling. If we instead use additional severance tax revenue for an income tax cut, local community infrastructure will continue to be a concern.

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, state budget, transportation

Fiscal Focus: Libraries

December 20, 2012 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Each Fiscal Focus will look at our vision for key areas of public investment in Ohio and provide insight into current budgetary trends for that sector. AllOhioans are impacted by our elected officials’ budget decisions. In 2013, a new two-year state budget will be crafted – this series will provide a comprehensive overview of the major questions and concerns for Ohio’s 2014-15 biennial budget.

“Free libraries maintained by the people are cradles of democracy,
and their spread can never fail to extend and strengthen the democratic idea, the equality of the citizen and the royalty of man. They are emphatically fruits of the true American ideal.”
Andrew Carnegie ,1903 dedication of the Carnegie Library, Washington, D.C.

Why the Public Should Invest
Ohioans love our libraries. 86% of Ohioans utilize our library systems each year and 88% of Ohioans ranked their library service as good or excellent. The Columbus and Cuyahoga County systems are consistently ranked as the top two library systems in the country. Our libraries do more than just book and video lending. They also provide literacy programs for all ages, open meeting space, and crucial Internet access for those trying to find jobs or complete homework without home Internet access. Many individuals in need of public assistance often turn to their libraries first when they don’t know where else to go.

The Current Reality
Ohioans support the public investment of 251 public library systems with over 700 branches in the state. Ohioans demonstrated this support in November by passing all local property tax levies for libraries! Despite this public support, state support has been cut by almost 25% since 2007. Between 2001-2010, local property taxes have doubled for libraries. However, property taxes cannot make up for stable state investment, because 80 (32%) public library systems have no local levy revenue and are almost entirely reliant upon the Public Library Fund for their operations.

Ohio public libraries receive their state support through the Public Library Fund (PLF). In 2012, the state spent $344 million compared to 2001 when the state spent $496.5 million through the PLF. Libraries have responded to these budget cuts by cutting jobs. In less than a decade, full-time staff has been reduced by 20%. We have already seen hours and services cut in local communities, and many branches are scheduled to close in 2013.

The 2014-15 Budget
To understand the current budget struggles of the PLF, we need a little history to explain how we arrived where we are. Like many programs, consistent state cuts have left the libraries in a situation where the status quo cannot be maintained and funding must be restored. The PLF is a set formula as a percentage of the General Revenue Fund.

In calendar year 2008, the PLF was set to be 2.22% of total General Revenue Fund (GRF) tax revenues. When the legislator debated the budget that went into effect in July of 2009, they decided to reduce the amount to 1.97%. The current budget that began in July of 2011 allocates 95% of those previous levels. Also, in our current budget the library fund was expected to do more by funding other related programs such as the Library for the Blind and a technology fund. These are worthwhile investments, but we must recognize that a shrinking pot of money is now expected to do more. Now in our upcoming budget debate, the fund will likely be set at 95% again, which will be 1.87% of the GRF. Further cuts the to GRF will continue to hurt our library investment.

The GRF receives 44% of its revenue from the Ohio income tax. Any cuts to the income tax rate will reduce the GRF and therefore reduce the Public Library Fund. In 2005, the legislature passed a tax ‘reform’ package that has reduced the income tax by 21%. The income tax cut and other reforms cost Ohio $2.5billion a year. This lost revenue could have been invested in preventing cuts to hours, after-school programs, literacy efforts and other valuable public services in which all Ohioans benefit.

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, library

Fiscal Focus: Mental Health

December 13, 2012 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
We should not allow any members of our community to go without the treatment and assistance they need. 1 in 17 Americans live with a severe mental health issue. Un-treated severe mental illness, like schizophrenia, increases the likelihood of homelessness, family dysfunction, inability to maintain stable employment, and other barriers to stability and security. Nationally, untreated mental illness costs more than $100 billion annually. And more important than the money is the human suffering of an individual and their family.

The Current Reality
The Ohio Department of Mental Health (ODMH) administers the majority of public support of mental health services in Ohio. In 2010, ODMH directly served 360,000 people through the public mental health system. Ohio has six regional psychiatric hospitals, but the majority of state services are administered through 50 county level boards that contract with over 400 local agencies to provide diverse services. Other agencies, like Ohio Department of Alcohol and Drug Addiction Services (ODADAS), have cross over and provide related mental health services.

In 2009, ODMH had a budget of $511.9 million and in 2012; ODMH’s budget is $485 million. That is more than $26 million less in services that can be provided (not even accounting for inflation). These funds are spent through the state hospital system and at least a quarter of all of these General Revenue Fund (GRF) dollars are sent to the local level for local boards and their community partners. ODADAS has an additional $60 million budget from the state which comes primarily from the GRF.

The 2014-15 Budget
The most crucial issue for mental health funding will be the amount of money available in the GRF. We need to recognize that flat level funding at $485 million is unacceptable. The Governor asked state agencies to prepare two budgets. The first will be with flat level funding and the second is at a 90% level. As a result of normal economic inflation, flat level funding is a cut in services available in our communities. A 90% budget would be especially severe, especially on top of the reductions already seen in recent years. In 2009, programs were funded at higher levels than they are under either of these plans.

The 50 local boards in Ohio are funded through federal, state, and local revenues. One upcoming budget issue that will have a direct impact on our mental health services will be Medicaid expansion. Ohio policymakers have a choice on whether they want to accept a federal expansion of Medicaid or not. It is important to remember that fewer people covered under Medicaid will mean fewer people that can receive mental health services in our communities.

A second issue that may be contentious in the next budget debate is the planned merger of ODADAS with ODMH. While the two agencies collaborate on many projects, mergers of agencies can be difficult and program elements can easily be lost in the move. If the state goes through with the merger, they must be cautious to enhance the quality of service. The reduction of administrative agencies in Columbus cannot translate into a reduction of social workers, service providers and dedicated individuals throughout the state that provide essential services.

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, Mental Health

Fiscal Focus: Senior Services

December 6, 2012 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
Community support for the elderly is a long held tradition. We all have personal stories and reasons to care about senior services. Senior citizens often have wisdom, experiences, and memories that are guiding lessons for the next generation. Ohio is an aging state with almost 1.5 million individuals over the age of 65 and over one million more between 55-64 years old.

The Current Reality
The Ohio Department of Aging provides many great services throughout Ohio. They administer programs that provide healthcare and living assistance, and they also administer employment and volunteer programs to help older Ohioans engage in their community. Our diverse senior services are a strong investment because they recognize that each individual has a different set of needs as they age.

Ohio has over 450 senior centers. Each center is unique in the services that they provide, trying to meet the needs of their local communities. These centers will provide social programs, transportation, shopping assistance, tax help, and other services. These programs receive a mix of local, state, and federal funding.

The Local Government Fund (LGF) has seen a 50% cut in the current budget and, despite a growing rainy day fund, these funds have not been restored. After the cuts in 2011, Van Wert County Council on Aging and the Delphos Senior Citizens’ Center no longer received any state funds through the Area Agency on Aging. Luckily, local property owners were able to pass two levies in 2011 to keep these programs running. Other communities have been placed in similar situations. Ohioans clearly value these services, passing all senior levies in November 2012. But, not every community feels they have the ability to pass a levy, and have made substantial service cuts due to loss of funds.

In addition to the visible needs of seniors such as physical and health conditions associated with old age, seniors deal with the hidden issues of abuse and depression. The Ohio Coalition for Adult Protective Services reported in May of 2011 that 32 counties lack a social worker with training in adult protective services. Trained social workers can help our elderly community members report abuse and neglect and stop financial scams. Adult protective services saw a 7% cut between fiscal years 2011 and 2012. Social service providers also report that close to 20% of seniors suffer from depression and social isolation is a contributing factor.

The 2014-15 Budget
In the upcoming budget, senior services will be a topic of consideration as the state discusses more spending cuts. The most notable discussion will center on healthcare policy and whether we should adopt the Medicaid Expansion of the Affordable Care Act (look for a future Fiscal Focus on this topic).

Related to healthcare, some past policies may be revisited. In the last state two-year budget, state programs were modified to increase home health service options over nursing homes. Home healthcare, when viable, can reduce costs and increase the quality of life for seniors. However, many advocates believe that the 2012-2013 budget lacked the administrative supports to make these program changes successful and rates were cut for providers. It is possible that we will see efforts to strengthen a system of care by addressing provider rate structures and administrative processes.

In addition to healthcare for seniors, basic services will also see a budget cut. The Ohio Estate Tax is set to expire at the end of this year. Some of the revenue collected is distributed to the local community of the decedent. It is important to remember that this is a tax that impacts fewer than 8% of Ohioans. Without replacing this revenue somehow in the GRF, local communities will see more cuts to local services.

As Ohio policymakers discuss the impact of another proposed cut to the state income tax, we need to remember that the 2005 tax policy changes cut the income tax by 21% and have cost us over $2.5 billion in annual revenue. This money could have helped train more social workers in senior care to prevent senior abuse, more programs for senior centers, and the resources to establish higher quality healthcare.

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, senior services

Fiscal Focus: Privatization

November 29, 2012 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
As Ohioans, we expect public services to be established for the common good. Privatizing our services – through sale of government assets or paying private business to do tasks government has done in the past – risks placing profit motives over the needs of our community. Despite any initial financial benefit from the sale of a public asset, the expected quality of service, effects on workers, and financial ramifications over time need to be taken into account. Long-term solutions – like stable and secure revenue sources – not short-term fixes, should be our goal.

The Current Reality
In recent years, Ohioans have seen privatization of prisons and schools, as well as our state economic development efforts with JobsOhio and parking at Ohio State University (OSU). Each of these actions brings promises of tax savings and improved services. But, charter schools’ performance remains low, Ohio’s recently privatized prison has raised concerns for health and safety, JobsOhio lacks basic accountability, and the OSU parking sale leaves major long-term financial questions.

Looking more closely at JobsOhio, created in 2011 under Governor Kasich, is instructive. When Ohio invests in development, social services, or other areas of public concern, Ohioans must have accountability and an ability to weigh in on the use of our investment. As a private organization, much of JobsOhio’s work is done beyond the scope of public input and scrutiny. For example, they invested public dollars into a company that was previously found guilty of Medicaid fraud. Regardless of the wisdom of this particular investment, shouldn’t the public have the ability to review this expense? Because of privatization, Ohioans lack oversight and there is little accountability.

In another example, our neighbors in Indiana privatized their turnpike in 2006. The state received over $3 billion for a 75-year lease. That money will be gone within the next 5 years, and beginning in 2016, the turnpike can increase tolls in every year of the lease. The foreign companies that own the Indiana turnpike garner their profits from higher tolls, less maintenance, and lower salaries and benefits for employees. In instances like these, the quality of service rarely is increased.

The 2014-15 Budget
We are likely to hear a lot more about privatization in the next budget, including our turnpike, prisons, and schools. While we expect other privatization efforts to be discussed, these three will top the list in the budget. We should not sacrifice quality of service, transparency, or the public interest for quick cash.

People for the American Way have developed a list of 10 questions that should be considered prior to any efforts to privatize essential public services. These should be taken seriously in Ohio as we debate policies around privatizing public services.

The Ohio turnpike discussions are arguably the most talked about issue related to privatization. Immediate money from a sale will undoubtedly intoxicate legislators, particularly as the Ohio Department of Transportation has delayed many crucial highway projects across the state. But, amongst many concerns, a sale or lease of the turnpike for 50 or 100 years will leave Ohioans vulnerable to changing needs in our state. This vulnerability is exacerbated because some road privatization efforts have non-compete clauses limiting infrastructure development for generations. Such contract limitations could also include a state takeover provision that requires the government to be on the hook for the losses.

Prison privatization has been largely unsuccessful. Governor Kasich did privatize one formerly publicly run prison in Ohio, but ODRC has delayed other privatization efforts over public concerns. Private prisons limit the staff numbers, benefits, and salaries. Some private prisons lack enough trained staff to maintain a safe and secure facility. The companies often overcrowd the prisons, because most states have a “per-prisoner” payment schedule. Finally, the prison will cut the most helpful services – mental health treatment, education, job training, and counseling.

Education is another government service being privatized. Charter schools are set up by private entities, often corporations. These entities receive money based on each student that they enroll and this is money pulled out of our public school system. Despite performance measures far below traditional public schools – 70% of public schools rate excellent or above, compared to only 16% of charters – policymakers continue to push this system of privatization.

As we move forward with the debate of public and private services, we need to remember that the 21% cut to the state income tax since 2005 has caused many financial constraints for the state. Ohio does not need to sell all of our assets and long-term investments this year. We can restore budget shortfalls by keeping public investments and ensuring stable and secure revenue sources.

Speak Up!
If you would like to get involved as the state budget nears and our advocacy increases, please follow us on Facebook, Twitter, or sign up for our emails. Please read our past Fiscal Focus article on Education or State Parks and stay on the look out for the next articles on corrections, health care, and the arts!

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, Privatization

Fiscal Focus: State Parks

November 20, 2012 by Nick Bates

Share This!

Why the Public Should Invest
The Ohio State Parks attract more than 50 million visitors and generate over a billion in tourism dollars each year with 85% of Ohioans utilizing this great public investment. The value of the parks is bigger than tourism dollars—the real value is the enhancement of our lives and our state. My best memories as a child were sleeping in a tent, cooking over the fire, biking, hiking, and swimming in our state parks. Now as a father, I cannot wait for my son to have similar experiences.

Ohio established the Division of Parks within the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) in 1949 to create, supervise, operate and maintain a system of state parks and to promote their use by the public. It added ‘Recreation’ to its title in 1963 when the state developed the first state recreation plan for a parks system in the country.

The Current Reality
Ohio now runs 75 state parks. When taking account for inflation, the parks have seen a loss of 23.5% of their state support since 1988. Ohio State Parks received $60.5 million from the General Revenue Fund (GRF) in the last biennial budget. This is a $4 million decrease from the previous budget, and a $19 million cut compared to FY 2008-09.

Currently Ohio has over $500 million worth of delayed maintenance projects, including $83 million in shoreline erosion, $72 million in dam repairs, and $47 million in bathroom upgrades. The state has attempted to fill its budget gaps over the past decade with a 45% reduction in staff, as well as closing hiking, biking, and horse trails that they couldn’t afford to maintain in a safe condition.

In addition to the continued trend of GRF cuts, in 2011 the Ohio legislature passed HB133 and HB153. HB133 opens up state parks for oil and gas drilling and HB153 opens up the parks for logging. Some advocates for this legislation point to the lease payments that the state will receive to supplement other state park operations. The total amount of revenue these projects will produce is unknown.

The 2014-15 Budget
Resource extraction from our parks will likely be the most contentious issue in our next state budget impacting parks. ODNR’s website illustrates how oil and gas drilling can bring in revenue to support our parks’ infrastructure. But, drilling and logging are not the only options. Ohioans must consider the cost associated with additional resource extraction – including park roads, loss of trees, repairs, and possible environmental clean ups. Also, some estimates have identified only a few years worth of oil or gas from lands owned by the states. If this ends up true, we will be looking for new revenues, once again, in a few years. So we must look for long-term solutions, and not just a boom or bust industry that may provide temporary revenue.

The state may consider other revenues sources such as new fees. While the state charges some fees for services, such as renting a campsite, most services remain free for all Ohioans. The Ohio legislature has historically rejected this approach, because the state has established a public system that should be open to all regardless of ability to pay. In 2004, fees charged accounted for 42% of the parks operating budget.

Philanthropy is a necessary component of our State Park system – generosity reflects well on the character of Ohioans. However, it cannot make up for adequate state support. In 2004, over 7,000 people invested their free time into our parks for 346,000 hours of service. ODNR in conjunction with the Ohio BMV offers Ohioans an opportunity to place a Wildlife license plate on their car for a $15 donation. In 2006, Ohio sold just over 34,000 of these license plates. While philanthropy is a great way to invest your own time and effort to preserve this public asset, State Parks need the type of investment that the state is able to make.

Fees and philanthropy will not be enough for the long-term investment our parks need. Drilling and logging must be balanced appropriately against the long-term financial costs and potential damage to natural beauty and intrinsic value. Long-term solutions would include how we structure taxes on corporate profits and the Ohio Income Tax. Since 2005, the income tax has been cut by 21%, and along with other revenue changes, has lead to $2.5 billion less in annual revenue. Governor Kasich has said he wants to cut the income tax again.

Speak Up!
We must preserve our public investment that prior generations have made into a great system of State Parks that so many of us have enjoyed. If you would like to get involved as the state budget nears and our advocacy increases, please follow us on Facebook, Twitter, or sign up for our emails. Please read our past Fiscal Focus article on EDUCATION HERE and stay on the look out for the next articles on transportation, health care, and libraries.

If you’re interested in additional information on state parks in the state budget or have any other related question, please contact us.

Filed Under: One Ohio Now Tagged With: Fiscal Focus, Parks


	Email Address Zip