135th Ohio General Assembly

Proponent Testimony of Spencer Dirrig, Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund
House Bill 2
Ohio House Government Oversight Committee
May 29, 2024

Chair Peterson, Vice Chair Thomas, Ranking Member Humphrey and Members of the Ohio House Government Oversight Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before this committee today on House Bill 2 (HB 2), legislation to delay the deadline for a major political party to certify its presidential. and vice presidential candidates to the Secretary of State for the 2024 general election. At the OEC Action Fund, we believe a healthy democracy is essential for a healthy environment. We support legislation designed to make common sense fixes to allow consistent administration of Ohio elections.

The OEC Action Fund urges a yes vote on H.B. 2, delaying the deadline for political party candidates to certify presidential and vice presidential candidates. We urge a yes vote as long as no other substantive provisions are added to the legislation that poison its common sense provisions.

Regardless of political affiliation, all Ohioans should want both major party candidates for President of the United States on the ballot in Ohio. Ohioans expect to vote in the Presidential election and have all eligible candidates on the ballot. This provision in the Ohio Revised Code isn’t new – but neither is the necessary fix. This body has acted in previous years to ensure Barack Obama, Mitt Romey, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden have all received ballot access, despite facing the same issue. Any attempt to change course, now that it impacts a President of the opposing party, is purely political gamesmanship and is an insult to Ohioans and our elections.

We know what change needs to happen to fix the issue—it should be easy and straightforward.

In the present instance, the problem impacts the Democratic candidate for President. But if a similar issue faced the Republican candidate for President, now or in the future, the OEC Action Fund would be here testifying for the exact same fix. This isn’t a partisan issue—all eligible candidates should be on the ballot as Ohio voters will expect them to be.

For these reasons, as long as the legislation isn’t amended to include any party’s “policy priorities,” meant to poison the legislation, the OEC Action Fund urges a yes vote on H.B. 2.

Respectfully submitted,

Spencer E. Dirrig
Director, Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund

Opponent Testimony of Spencer Dirrig, Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund
House Bill 1
Ohio House Government Oversight Committee
May 29, 2024

Chair Peterson, Vice Chair Thomas, Ranking Member Humphrey and Members of the Ohio House
Government Oversight Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before this committee today on House Bill 1 (H.B. 1), legislation on Campaign Finance Law regarding foreign nationals and statewide initiatives. At the Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund, we know a healthy and inclusive democracy is essential for a healthy environment. We oppose legislation designed to restrict the power and freedom of Ohioans to organize and participate in democratic processes.

The voices being silenced by this legislation belong to real people who genuinely desire to improve
their communities. My grandparents took the little money they had and brought my mother to this country because they believed America was the shining beacon of freedom and democracy. Unquestionably, becoming a United States citizen was the best day of their lives, and they treasured that accomplishment immensely. But that process is long and arduous. They spent 8 and 14 years, respectively, in this nation before becoming citizens. Throughout that time, they donated to nonprofit organizations, organized community members to support one another, and supported issues they cared deeply about. This legislation is antithetical to the democracy my family and many others came here to experience.

The OEC Action Fund supports more disclosure and transparency in campaign finance, whether regarding ballot initiatives or electoral candidates. Such disclosure requirements should be evenly applied to all organizations, ensuring transparency in Ohio elections. Those disclosure requirements should not be designed around targeting immigrants and the organizations they support.

H.B. 1’s language creating “alternative political organizations” and their associated disclosure requirements are not actually about ballot initiative transparency—they are designed to chill grassroots organizations supporting ballot initiatives and punish them for inclusively working with immigrants in their communities.

If this body would like to truly improve transparency by increasing disclosure across the board for organizations and individuals that engage in political expenditures, we’d welcome that. This legislation is a targeted effort to attack a small subset of individuals and organizations—and it’s being presented in bad faith.

It’s crucial to note that the contribution of foreign money to influence domestic elections is already illegal under federal law, and these restrictions already apply to state elections. However, H.B. 1 goes beyond these necessary measures and instead, it aims to impose complex restrictions on local, citizen-led organizations that support ballot initiatives. Non-profit organizations, including those that support environmental causes, receive donations from a variety of sources, and not all of them are necessarily U.S. citizens. This legislation, if enacted, would not only stifle the voices of immigrants but also hinder their ability to support causes that directly impact them, even before they can vote.

Donations from foreign sources in other countries are already regulated by federal law—any legislation specifically targeting those sources would be duplicative. Thus, this bill is unnecessary for a more narrowly tailored purpose and, in its broad form, restricts the First Amendment rights of Ohioans. Of import, U.S. residents who are not yet U.S. citizens are still afforded rights under the U.S. Constitution.

As demonstrated during the August special election last year, Ohioans cherish their right to use ballot initiatives when necessary to make changes in our state. They are ready and willing to act in defense of our democracy. This bill should be called what it is—an attack on Ohioans to organize, regardless of citizenship status.

Given the negative implications of H.B. 1, we strongly urge all members of the Ohio House Government Oversight Committee to vote against this bill. It’s crucial that we protect the rights and voices of all Ohioans.

Respectfully submitted,

Spencer E. Dirrig
Director, Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund

Proponent Testimony (Written)
Ohio House Bill 197 (Hoops/Ray)
Ohio House Public Utilities Committee
April 24, 2024

Chair Stein, Vice Chair Blasdel, Ranking Member Weinstein, and members of the Ohio House Public Utilities Committee,

My name is Nolan Rutschilling and I serve as Managing Director of Energy Policy for the Ohio Environmental Council (OEC) Action Fund. Our organization works to secure healthy air, land, and water for all who call Ohio home. Thank you for allowing me to provide written proponent testimony on Ohio House Bill 197 (HB 197).

The OEC Action Fund has pushed Ohio to transition away from fossil fuels and toward clean, renewable sources of energy in order to fight climate change and put Ohio on a path to a sustainable future. Community solar pilot programs, like those created by HB 197, are long overdue in the state. These pilot programs will spur development of clean energy generation, help Ohioans save money on their electric bills, and create new development opportunities in communities that have been left behind by the energy transition. These programs bring a new set of Ohio residential and small business customers into the clean energy transition who aren’t able to install rooftop solar, whether it’s because they rent, their home or building doesn’t receive the right type of sunlight, they don’t have access to the capital necessary for solar. Passing House Bill 197 will bring environmental benefits and cost savings to Ohioans,
and drive economic development and job creation in Ohio. The OEC Action Fund urges support for this legislation.

Example of Successful Implementation

While community solar is new to Ohio, it is not new to energy grids across the country, and it is not new to many utilities. The following affiliates of Ohio’s Electric Distribution Utilities
(EDU) operate in states with community solar currently:

• Maryland (Potomac Edison/First Energy)
• New Jersey (First Energy)
• North Carolina (Duke Energy)
• New Mexico (AES retail affiliate is currently developing community solar projects)

AEP Energy, AEP Ohio’s parent company, has resources around community solar on their website, and are seeing potential community solar legislation in Virginia¹, where their affiliate Appalachian Power operates. With this noted, we are confident the pilot programs under HB 197 will be easily established and supported by the EDUs, if they are able to draw upon their experience in other states.

The state of Maryland adopted a community solar pilot in 2016. It’s worth noting Potomac Edison, First Energy’s utility in Maryland, has successfully participated in the program. While utilities are able to participate in the pilot as subscriber organizations, no utility chose to operate a project, likely because they were unable to recover project costs in base rates. The Public Service Commission of Maryland issued a report² on the Community Solar program in 2022, sharing the following takeaways:

• Each of the utilities participating indicated that there was no negative impact on their standard service offerings, including Potomac Edison.
• Programs grew steadily throughout the four years of the study, carefully managed across utility territories.
• The study also identified that community solar projects may provide “offsetting cost-related benefits that are compared against program costs and non-financial benefits related to societal or economic measures.”

The OEC Action Fund urges passage of HB 197. Ohio has been a leader in energy choice for decades, allowing Ohioans to select where their energy comes from and what type of energy to use. This legislation removes an unnecessary barrier that blocks Ohioans from choosing solar, and enables a new set of Ohioans to take advantage of the cost saving and environmental benefits of solar. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today.

Nolan Rutschilling
Managing Director of Energy Policy
Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund

---

1
https://cardinalnews.org/2024/02/12/a-shared-solar-program-for-appalachian-power-customers-is-one-step-closer-to-reality/
2
https://www.psc.state.md.us/wp-content/uploads/Report-on-the-Community-Solar-Energy-Generating-Systems-CSEGS.pdf

Opponent Testimony – Ohio House Bill 349 (Barhorst, Jones)
Nolan Rutschilling, Managing Director of Energy Policy
April 30, 2024

Chair Swearingen, Vice Chair Santucci, Ranking Member Upchurch and members of the House Economic and Workforce Development Committee, my name is Nolan Rutschilling and I am the Managing Director of Energy Policy for the Ohio Environmental Council (OEC) Action Fund. Our organization works to secure healthy air, land and water for all who call Ohio home. Thank you for the opportunity to provide written opponent testimony for Ohio House Bill 349.

To put it simply: in a time of high profits for oil and gas companies and increasing concerns around polluting natural gas infrastructure, HB 349 takes Ohio taxpayer dollars and allocates incentives for natural gas pipelines and development. Particularly troubling is the reduction of natural gas companies’ property taxable value. By altering the valuation formula for natural gas company property, property taxes are cut by up to 75%. This is egregious at a time when Ohioans across the state, particularly seniors and low income homeowners, struggle to keep up with their rising property taxes. Natural Gas companies need to pay their fair share of taxes to Ohio communities, and don’t need more funding for infrastructure that can damage our water and land, as recently seen in Athens County and Columbiana County.

Ohioans are being hit with rising costs in both the regulatory and legislative space. This bill increase comes at a time when utilities like Dominion Energy and Columbia Gas continue to seek increases in monthly fixed costs, which remain steady no matter how much gas customers use. This legislation is part of a pattern of corporate giveaways in the same vein as House Bill 201, which increased the ability for natural gas utilities to charge Ohioans for pipeline to economic development sites, at the expense of ratepayers and the environment.

Enough is enough: Ohioans deserve better than more fossil fuel bailouts. The OEC Action Fund urges a no vote on HB 349, both in Committee and on the House floor.

Sincerely,

Nolan Rutschilling
Managing Director of Energy Policy
Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund