June 8, 2026 · Ohio Controlling Board · 7,700 words · 12 speakers · 163 segments
The Ohio Controlling Board, seeing that all members are present, the Secretary will call the roll. Senator Serino? Here. Senator Wilkin? Here. Senator Ingram? Here. Representative Stewart? Here. Representative Javilla? Present. Representative Sweeney? Here. President DeSantis? Here. The minutes of the previous meeting have been distributed. Is there a motion to approve the minutes?
Moved by Senator Serino. Do we have a second? Second.
Second by Senator Ingram. Are there any objections?
Seeing no objections, the minutes are approved.
There are two updates to today's agenda. Item 41 from the Department of Commerce has been deferred at the request of the agency, and item 44 from the Department of Administrative Services has also been deferred. Okay, moving on. I'll now poll the members for holds. Senator Serino.
Yes, I'd like to hold on 43 and 76.
Thank you. Senator Wilkin?
32 and 39, please.
Thank you. Senator Ingram?
I'd like to hold 5 and 6.
5 and 6. Thank you, Senator. Representative Stewart?
32 and 76.
32 and 76. Representative DeVilla?
74 please
74 and represent Sweeney
No Holt
Thank you Okay, will you read all the items? Items five and six, the Secretary of State. Item 32, the Department of Aging. Item 39, the Department of Higher Education. Item 43, the Department of Administrative Services. Item 74, the Department of Natural Resources. Item 76, the Department of Transportation. Okay, thank you. Is there a motion to approve all items not held by the board?
Moved by Senator Wilkin. Do I have a second? Second by Senator Ingram.
Okay, are there any objections? Hearing none. Okay, all those that have no objections, they are approved. Representatives for agencies' approved requests are free to leave quickly and quietly. and hopefully we'll get a little bit more space in this hearing room thank you that wasn't going to be very fun Thank you. All right. Moving on to our first item held. It is item number five, Secretary of State. Welcome, Maureen.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
Thank you for having me.
My name is Leslie Pyatt, and I am the CFO for the Office of the Ohio Secretary of State.
Thank you. Senator Ingram.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you so much. I just want a point of clarification as to what this is for. And, of course, five and six go together because you're taking from one account. and then, of course, from another. So help me with where you got the 2.5.
Yes, Mr. President, Senator Ingram.
It is based on estimates from previous years with knowing that there's going to be some increases in postage costs, and it is just an estimate at this time. We're not going to have the exact numbers of items that are being printed and then mailed until later in the summer. So we did ask for $2.5 million in appropriation last time, so two years ago, and we ended up with a small cash balance of approximately $200,000 left, and so we are going to use that, and that's why we're only asking for about $2.3 million in the cash transfer in the next item.
Okay. Follow-up, Senator?
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you for that. And, of course, I knew it was an estimate. So why on these don't we do and up to for these, or we just do the amount and then whatever's left over you keep for the next go around?
Mr. President, Senator Ingram, I don't know that the law specifically says that we can do that.
In Section 111.31, it says the only way that we can send out these absentee ballot applications is by action of the Controlling Board and or the General Assembly. So I think that's why, is that this law requires us to come to the controlling board every time we request to do this process. Thank you.
Senator?
I think that one of the things we should do is make sure that we're doing an up-to, because unfortunately I think that that amount's going to change not just because of postal costs, but because of other actions that are being taken regarding absentee ballots and who can receive the application, let alone the ballot itself. So thank you.
Any other questions, Senator?
No.
Any questions from the other members? Seeing none, are there any objections to this item? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you for your time. Let's move on to item six. You might want to stay there. I'm sorry.
Thank you.
She covered.
Oh, you covered that one too? Do we have any more questions to that item? Any objections to that item? Hearing no objections, that item is approved too.
Thank you. I apologize for leaving early.
All right, moving on. The next item is number 32, Department of Aging.
Good afternoon. I am Alex Lapso, Chief Legislative Officer with the Ohio Department of Aging.
Thank you, Senator Wilkin.
Thank you, Mr. President. Thanks for being here. I'm sorry we missed each other earlier. might have been able to avoid if I'd have been able to talk to you. This is one of those where I guess my overall question is, for $600,000, what are we getting? What are we doing here?
Absolutely.
So through the President, Senator Wilkin, thank you so much for the question. So with this request, we have a series of contracts in order to help us administer our Excel Academy. The Excel Academy was created as part of the Governor's Nursing Home Quality and Accountability Task Force Recommendations Report in order for us to improve overall quality of care and quality of life across Ohio's nursing homes. These contracts, it's a coordinated effort across staff at the Department of Aging. We have a clinical advisory group. We have Concept Health here and other contractors. It's a coordinated effort for us to skill up and train up nursing facility staff across the state. Since the Excel Academy was established in 2023, we've had 146 facilities participate. That's approximately 16% of all licensed facilities in the state. We build out course curriculum based on evidence-based best practices. And then meet with the facilities, mentor on-site, offer trainings on-site as well. across varying curriculum, and this is really geared towards reducing hospitalizations. We call that course transitions of care, looking at medication optimization. Nutrition continues to be something that is reviewed. We've had additional courses that aren't offered right now, but they're looking at severe mental illness, substance abuse disorders. There's a new course that's now developed on dementia called Cognitive Impairment is the name of the course. So this is our ability in order to help facilities improve their overall quality of care and quality of life for Ohio's nursing home residents.
Follow up. So you said 146 or roughly 16% of the nursing home has taken advantage of this. For that group that has taken advantage, what kind of improvement have we seen? Is there higher rates of satisfaction? I guess that's kind of what I mean. Like what are we getting for the money?
Most certainly. With regard to that question, I would like to call up my colleague. Her name is Jody Snyder. She is the chief of our quality initiatives division and oversees the administration of the Excel Academy.
Hello. Thank you, Senator. Welcome for the question. Concept Rehab provides one-to-one mentors. They provide mentors that go out and work with our facilities that complete a course, and as part of the take-home for each of the facilities, as they complete the six-week course, they create a Quality Assurance Performance Improvement Plan, or a QAPI. A QAPI is a requirement of their regulatory body in order to be a licensed nursing home in the community. And so the metrics for each of the courses are a little different. So yes, we see resident satisfaction improvement, survey questions regarding the nutrition course. With medication optimization, it's about looking at the number of residents and is there a reduction in the number of medications an individual is taking. And then infection prevention control obviously looks at what you would think, number of people that would be transferred in or out due to some sepsis or MRSA or something like that and the infection rate. So it really varies between course, but if you wanted specific details for courses, I could get that to you. Follow up, please.
So do you have a number or is there any percentage of the 146, how many of them have seen improvement?
Across all the metrics, we have just, I would say, general improvement, I would say 75 to 80% say that they have general improvement. We have about a third of the facilities. We turn for additional courses, so they see value in it because they come back to it. Once they take one course, they come back and take another. And so that tells me that they see value in it. But the metrics, at least 70% see some type of improvement in either their procedures, their operations, in the individual resident metrics.
So when you say you would say 70%, is there, like, do you have the, so we know what it is? Like, are you tracking so that we know what percentage it is?
So Excel Academy is a new program. Some of our courses have only been offered once, and we're just getting ready to repeat them and offer them two times. And so it's hard to do metrics from one to the beginning. As you know, with startup initiatives, sometimes the programs get tweaked. So like medication optimization, the first time was an eight-week class. Now we just finished it last week at five weeks, so we can't do comparisons back-to-back, and we don't have improvement numbers for that course that just completed. I've been with the program since September, and so we are building out additional metrics. We know that that is a need of the legislature to want to see that across the metrics and across the curriculums.
Follow-up? Thank you.
Can we step to Representative Stewart first? He held this as well.
Thank you, Mr. President. So my understanding is generally we have two contractors who you like their work and even though we have a competitive bidding law we just want to waive that and say they get to keep doing the work Am I materially way off in any way?
These two contractors have been contractors with the Department of Aging dating back into fiscal year 2023. They were brought on as part of the original initiatives around quality improvement for nursing homes called the Regional Rapid Response, or RAP, if you remember that from the pandemic days. And so both of these contractors were contractors that were with that initiative and had continued on with age as we've taken those initiatives with RAP and continued into what has now become the Quality Initiatives Division and Excel Academy.
If you follow up, please. Yes. Is it your position that if you open this up that these are the only two folks in the state of Ohio that would apply to be able to get this government contract?
I believe once you open an RFP up that other people may apply. What it would do to the program is potentially delay any further programming after July, at least until we get the RFP. It would probably take the program to nonexistence for about six months, maybe longer.
Follow up? Yes. then why didn't we bid start this waiver? Why didn't we start the bidding process well in advance of the deadline? Because we've done this now multiple times where the agency runs right up to the deadline and then says, well, gee, shucks, we couldn't possibly follow the competitive bidding law because we've refused to do it up to this point. We're going to play chicken with you to approve the waiver.
I think Alex may be able to talk about the current contract language. No, through the president, to the representative, thank you for the question. And so with at this point, the contractors that are a part of this particular item, they have been working with us for some time. As Jody mentioned, we had the Regional Rapid Response Assistance Program that helped us with pandemic response efforts. These individuals, the company as well, they have existing relationships with the industry in order to help us best maximize and make efficient the entire process with administering the Excel Academy.
You could say that about every single contractor we have in the state of Ohio, but we have a competitive bidding law that says other people get a chance to bid on state contracts. I'm not hearing any contradiction of my timeline, which is you didn't want to open it back up, so you just didn't do it. And then we get to the deadline, and when I say, why didn't we follow the law? You say, well, gosh, if we followed the law, now we're going to have a pause in the program. Am I way off in the timeline?
Through the president to the representative, we certainly understand. With regard to where the current status of Ohio's nursing homes, we are actively aiming to improve their overall quality. These individuals, as well as the company in question, have helped us not only during the pandemic response efforts, but also with administration of the Excel Academy. And maintaining continuity of overall program delivery is very important for residents of Ohio's nursing homes.
I don't have a follow-up, Mr. President, but I'll just say this is time and time and time again with the agencies, and it will be my budget amendment number one to say we are going to put an actual hard shot clock on this, because this gaming of the competitive bidding law has got to stop.
Senator Ingram?
Thank you, Mr. President. I just have a question in regard as to who attends as far as at the facility, because it is a requirement that they take these trainings. And so who attends? Does everybody at the facility attend, or is it the administrators, or whom?
Through the president to the senator, staff are selected by the facilities. It may depend on which course or module is being offered. So with regard to reducing the risk of hospitalizations, infection prevention control efforts, could potentially be directors of nursing, direct care staff. With regard to nutrition, it may be chefs, dieticians, nutritionists, those helping to prepare the food. So it really does all depend on the type of course that is being offered. Those individuals would be selected by the facilities in order to continue their educational efforts.
Follow-up center? Thank you, Mr. Chair. And those are, Mr. President, and those facilities are all required by regulation to have that training. And so how are you, as the Department of Aging, keeping track of, or the Excellence Academy, keeping track of who's keeping what so that at one point, maybe it's next year or year after next or something, that we're able to determine what to compare as to say whether or not the program is worth it. Because I'm going to tell you, I get complaints all the time. I have, right now it's like herding cats to see who's responsible for something that goes wrong in the nursing home. And I'm having issues with who does the inspection. So, you know, other than throwing all of that out there, I've been aging the ombudsman's person and all of that trying to make sure that this is all taken care of. So what do you have in place now? Say, here's how we're going to track who's doing what, so that eventually we'll get to something that makes sense, so that we will know if indeed it's making a difference if you're only sending the cook to the nutrition and the person that's feeding the person doesn't know.
Well, through the president and to the senator, thank you again for the question. Just a quick point of clarification. The Excel Academy remains voluntary. We certainly, of course, want to encourage facilities to participate in this. There is support for participation because it is cost neutral to facilities. Facilities pay a nursing home franchise fee. We are distributed a portion of the overall fees that are collected by the Department of Medicaid, and this program helps. It's funded through those fees. And so we, of course, want facilities and facilities we believe are interested in participating in this because we are reinvesting their fees back into these educational opportunities for staff.
Follow-up, Senator? Well, I guess maybe I'm just a little more confused because you do recall in 23 when we did that whole around the state touring that it wasn't pretty. so how are we ensuring that whatever we're spending and wherever the money comes from getting us to where we need to be so what does the department have set up to keep track of who volunteered to go who didn't what difference it makes and all that you got to have something there's no way in the world that you don't have nothing through the president to the senator thank
Thank you again for the follow-up. I will ask that Jody, given her expertise, to help further adjust your question. We certainly track the facilities that participate in the courses that they participate in, and then we have the metrics for their participation. We are right now working with our program and analysis evaluation team to compare facilities that participate for those metrics versus facilities that don't participate. But that is a new initiative to compare to be able to say that those who participate not only improve their own quality, but they actually do better than non-participating because we want everyone to participate. I think maybe the training that you're referencing is the mandatory training required to be licensed as a nursing facility through the Department of Health, which is separate. That's what we call the baseline to operate as a nursing facility. what Excel Academy is designed for is to go beyond just the minimum regulatory requirements to be licensed, but to actually look at quality of care and quality of life metrics in the facilities and make changes in your practices and how you interact and how you engage residents and improve your practices.
Paul?
They all go together. you've got your basic license and people get it and then you just can't let people go and do nothing. So the intent for the Excel Academy was to get us to something that will make sure that the proper training is happening and that we're not letting our people who are in those facilities not be served properly. So I'm glad to hear you say that you are tracking that information and trying to make some type of comparison because here again, we do have some situations that are still not pretty. And so I don't know if there should be a way that you, along with the Department of Health, say back to some of those facilities, here we've had some issues, maybe we need to send some people in for training. So whether they want it or not, guess what, you get it. And then that way we'll get to Senator Wilkins' question as to what do we get for it. I guess that wasn't a question word.
Through the president to the senator, no, most certainly. We certainly appreciate your comments and your ongoing advocacy for those that we serve. Thank you very much.
Are there any other questions from board members? Seeing none, are there any objections to this item? Objection. Object. Come on in. The water's fine. Purpose of development. Objection from you as well. Yes. Okay. Okay, the item is approved with objections from Representative Stewart and Representative DeVilla. Thank you. Next item is item number 39, Department of Higher Education.
Good afternoon, Michael Graham, Director of Legislative Affairs at the Department of Higher Education. Thank you.
Senator?
Thank you, Mr. President. On this one, I guess there's a lot of it is, you know, with the issues that we've had, I think it's good when we're going to spend about $4 million, roughly.
Through the President and to the Senator. So for FY26, this request would transfer approximately. $3.5 million into the Central State Supplement, and then for FY27, it would transfer approximately $5.3 million to the Central State Supplement, both from the two already existing Central State land grant line items.
Okay. My apologies. I just added the $973 and the $2.5, the other ones. Okay. So tell us what's going on at Central State right now. What all does this include? What are we getting? How are we making sure that we don't end up in the same position we ended up not too long ago?
Absolutely. Through the president and to the senator, I will actually invite up Ken Hinault from the Department of Administrative Services. He's currently serving as executive on loan to Central State and can discuss more about what these funds will produce for Central State. Thank you.
through the president to the senator. So the $3.5 million that we're requesting be transferred for this fiscal year, we're intending to pay down some short-term debts to kind of act as a budgetary relief for future fiscal years. So, again, kind of cleaning the slate for Central State University and kind of prepping them to be able to advance forward in a steady state. The request for fiscal year 27 funds, the approximately $5 million, dollars. The intent for that is really to start acting as a seed for a cash reserve. There are some obligations that rely on a cash reserve in the future, some payback opportunities that need to happen to the state that hinge on having a 60-day cash reserve balance. So we want to start seeding that with those funds, kind of deprioritizing for a moment the land grant program and investing more heavily on the operations of the university.
Follow-up, Senator? Thank you. Can you tell us what do you mean when you talk about short debts What all are we talking about there Through the president through the senator So the university has through the Ohio Air Quality Commission
has a bond that was issued in 2013 for some energy project conservation efforts. The repayment on that back to the Air Quality Commission goes through calendar year 28. So the thought would be to front load some of that, get some of that paid back. They also have, with a particular supplier, they've got some short-term debts that are leased equipment kind of purchases and some other projects that were financed over a five-year term, a number of different agreements that roll up to about $3 million, still outstanding.
Follow up, Bob. Would I be correct in saying these are, are you telling me these are like energy efficiency type upgrades that they've done? And if the answer to that is yes, aren't lots of these supposed to pay for themselves, but yet we're kicking in more money to still pay for them?
Through the president and to the senator, the first one through Ohio Air Quality was intended to be that. And you're right, I think in an ideal world where the funds are managed a little bit more cleanly, the savings would pay for this. the others weren't energy projects. They were investments in the stadium, classroom equipment, sports equipment, just kind of general operating equipment and supplies for the university.
Follow-up, Senator? Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. When you say if the fund had been managed, so did the project need managed better or did the fund the money was coming out of or both?
Through the president to the senator. So the project appeared to be completed in 2015 and had all the proper paperwork to go with it. I guess what I'm saying is we've seen kind of a series of financial challenges, right? And so any savings that have come about from energy projects, may have been just shifted to general operations instead of more focused on the payback of those bonds.
Follow-up, Senator. Thank you.
Senator Serino.
Thank you, Mr. President. A couple questions here. Maybe I'll throw a couple of them out, and we won't have to do follow-ups as much. Central State has a unique mission, and we all understand that, and the state I think has been pretty committed to supporting it numerous times under financial stress. And first of all, is the debt service, are you actually paying off some older bonds early, or is this strictly debt service?
Through the president to the senator, it would be paying off that bond early. It comes to its term ends in two years.
Follow-up? And are these high or low interest rate bonds that you're looking to pay off?
Through the President, through the Senator, I honestly have to go back and check the documents. I don't have the interest rate. I just hope that you're not paying off, you know, 2%, 3% bonds. Yeah, on the air quality bond, that's the one I don't have. on the ones that were kind of privately leased, the interest rates range from 8% to 11%, so fairly high.
Follow-up. So if you could get to the President's attention, the information on what bonds you're retiring and what the interest rates are, that would be helpful. Again, I think the state of Ohio has been very committed to Central State's mission, But I will tell you that just for the record, I think the Board of Trustees have been asleep at the wheel for some time there. The safety issues for the students that we've talked about before at Controlling Board is inexcusable, in my opinion. And they're actually jeopardizing fulfillment of the mission of the university in the first place. And I, for one, am going to be very, very tough on future appropriations there, unless we see some change in direction and probably a switch out of the Board of Trustees, who, again, who have not been doing their job, to assure that the mission can be fulfilled. That's all I have, Mr. President.
Questions? Senator Ingram.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. President. And thank you for this, and thank you for being the executive on loan from there for that time, because you've been there for a minute or two now. My question is in regard to the dollars, because for a very long time, remember, this is a land-grant institution. And so, therefore, there are certain requirements from the state that have to be matched from the feds. And so when we talk about the money, is it part of that requirement that's also trying to help cover what needs to be covered here? There may have been some disparity in who was doing what, but there's a certain requirement that was there for, and then for a long time wasn't even being done. And now that we are, is that where some of these dollars are coming from?
Through the president to the senator. Yes, essentially. So you're talking about the state matching requirements for the land grant funding. Ohio has matched the federal funds at 100 percent. There is a waiver process through the Department of Agriculture that can lower that to 50 percent. And so that's effectively what we're trying to do here is repurpose some of those land grant dollars up to that 50 percent waiver amount against the federal funds. Follow up, Senator.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. So did the Department of Higher Ed ever receive that waiver, or have they heard back from the feds regarding that?
Through the president to the senator. So the university has been interacting directly with the USDA, and their stance, and I'm paraphrasing, is they would like to see some legislative action from Ohio first, because Ohio has met the match already. And so their stance was kind of the state's done what it's supposed to do, and we're going to sit tight for now. And we're meeting, Mr. President, we are meeting the match now.
Okay. Yeah, and just to add a little bit more to that through the president and to the senator. So you may recall this item was originally on the agenda for the April 27th controlling board meeting, And it was deferred at that point at the request of the agency because we were still waiting to hear from the National Institute of Food and Agriculture within the U.S. Department of Agriculture on that waiver. And as Ken mentioned, we have heard from them since and essentially indicated to Central State University that in their eyes, the match has already been met via appropriation. Therefore, the controlling board essentially would have to approve this item before it would move forward in the review process with NIFA.
Any questions from any other members? Seeing none, are there any objections to this item? Hearing none, the item is approved. Thank you. Next is item number 43, Department of Administrative Services.
Good afternoon. My name is Carolyn Mangus. I'm the Chief Legislative Officer with the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, and I'll be happy to answer any questions that you have pertaining to this item.
Thank you. Senator?
Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you for coming in today. I'm quite familiar with the area. I have gone to that building, your building, and tried to park and had to valet park at the Ritz Hotel, which is across the street, which is very expensive. So I understand the complete situation of parking in downtown Cleveland. I guess, and I'm okay with this, I think you've done well relative to the appraised values and so on. Just two questions. One is I want to make sure that the state employees that are going to be using that are going to be assessed parking fees that are in line with other state employees, non-state house employees, but other remote offices, that it's being done in a fair manner. So let me just leave you with that one first.
Sure. Thank you so much for the question through the President, Senator Serino. Yes, and it will be assessed in a similar way. For your reference, we actually are, we have an office building, BWC does, over on Spring Street, and we actually have a parking garage that we own and operate there, and we do have employees that pay to park there. So we are familiar with operating something that would be similar to this.
Well, that's a garage, and this is a lot. It would be a similar situation.
and our intention is to have not only our employees, but there's actually a lot of other agencies that have offices in the Lausche building. So the lot would be made available for them to park at. They would pay a fee to park. It would be an unsubsidized rate, but our hope is that it would be below market rent.
Follow up, please. Okay, thank you for that. So I guess two other questions that I had. One is, have you sought some guidance on zoning in Cleveland that would either preclude or allow you to build a garage on that property, a multilevel garage, if you needed to do that in the future?
Through the president, Senator Serino. So I want to go back to the last question. I said rent. I meant rate, not rent. Yeah. So this is actually an existing lot that we're looking to purchase. Right. So it's an existing surface lot that has 350 spaces. It actually, the entity that owns it right now uses kind of a national commercial parking lot operator to run it. We envision, should we be able to move forward with a purchase that we would do something similar.
So I'm not sure I understood your answer. So is there anything in Cleveland zoning laws that would currently preclude you from being able to build a garage on that property?
Through the president, Senator Serino. So we're not building a garage. This would be an existing lot that is...
I know, I know. Okay. I'm sorry, let me...
In the future...
Oh, okay, you're talking about in the future. Perspectively, yes.
Yes. Okay, through the president. At this time, we don't have plans to do that, but I think what you're asking about is if we purchased it and held it as an asset, what would be a potential future?
Is there anything that would preclude you from doing that?
Sure. I will be honest. I don't have the answer to that question right now. I'm not aware that it's something that we actually looked at. We have spent most of our time focused on how it's being used right now as just a surface lot that has 350 spaces and kind of looking at that and hoping to maintain that should we purchase it. I'm not sure that we really, although I will say we are trying to look at the property and doing some due diligence efforts in terms of to enter any environmental remediation that might be done, which would further maybe guide potential future uses as we learn more about that. Does that make sense?
Yeah, sure. So the other question is since on weekends and evenings, given the parking
situation in downtown Cleveland, these are going to be valuable spaces for sure. So what is the liability issue in terms of people that will be using it, the public will be using it on the weekends for a Guardians game, let's say, or for a Browns game? What is the liability situation
and how have you scoped that out Sure thank you for the question through the President Senator Serino I might defer I have with us our chief financial officer Kevin G Angola Like I said before we are looking to use the parking lot in the same way that being used now We will need to hire an operator As I mentioned right now, there's an operator in place that is a nationwide commercial operator that's familiar with parking lots. And so I'm not totally aware of the specifics in terms of liabilities, but I'm going to see if my colleague can help answer that because he's been involved in some of the discussions.
Okay.
Mr. President, Senator Serino, we operate a 350 spot parking garage currently in downtown Columbus. and my experience in operating that garage tells me that there is very little liability associated with running a commercial organization of that type. Of course, we would work with our partners at the Department of Administrative Services to ensure that we are properly insured for any potential liability, but our experience to date tells us that there is very little risk associated with such an operation.
Okay, thank you. All up?
No, I'm good.
Questions from any other members? Seeing none, are there any objections to this item? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you both.
Thank you.
Next item is item number 74. Ryan Frazee, Chief Financial Officer, Department of Natural Resources.
Thank you.
Representative DeVilla. Thanks, Mr. President. Mr. Frazee, good to see you. This is an appropriation increase. We're obviously at about the halfway point in the biennium. I'm just curious for this additional $1.1 million for fiscal 27 in the engineering division, what is this going for in terms of salaries?
Sure. Mr. President, Representative DeVilla, so maybe I'll take one step back. So the department was very grateful in $202 million being appropriated from the ARPA fund for various projects at state parks. We've been able to use some of the ARPA monies, about 2% of the ARPA monies, for projects for project managers working on those projects for payroll. So we've lessened our expenses on the state bond side. So really this increase is a result of the department, as of this morning, has spent 98% of those ARPA monies. That one-time money has gone away. So using this $1.1 million increase, this would really be for project management staff for all of those projects in the capital bill that have been appropriated.
Okay, follow up, please. And just to give us a sense, what level of staff is that generally? Are we talking sort of mid-grade, senior, something else?
Mr. President, Representative Davila, that would be all the way from like a natural resources administrator, project manager one, project manager two, natural resource engineer one, two, three, four. so it would be a plethora of different classifications.
Very good. Thank you.
Follow-up, represent? Questions for any other members? Seeing none, are there any objections to this item? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you. Okay, next item is item number 76, Department of Transportation.
Good afternoon. My name is Greg Virgimani. I'm with the Ohio Department of Transportation Legislative Affairs.
Thank you. Representative Stewart. Thank you, Mr. President. So I think this is the fourth time we've had an attempt to do a totaling study through Controlling Board. Three other times we have deferred it or taken it off or said no. And now we're back again. And I guess the question is, you know, we've been down this road before with government studies, which always come back with what the government wants them to say. Okay, so this scenario I think several of us have concerns about is we have one administration that only has six months left on the job, and now we're going to pay millions of dollars to commission a study that tries to tell the next executive, well, gee, you need to put tolls on Ohio's roads. and then it just sits there like a turd in a punch bowl ready for where everybody writes the same story over and over again. We've commissioned a study and spent millions of dollars to be told that we have to put tolls on Ohio's roads and that's for the next governor to have to deal with. Why should the next governor have to be saddled with a tolling study? Why can't we just defer this to the next administration and let the next administration decide whether they want to put tolls on Ohio's roads or not?
Through the President to the Representative Stewart. Thank you for your question. You are correct. We had this controlling board request deferred in the February meeting, but since that time, with the feedback that we received, we've taken the scope of the original research project, made it very narrow, and the consultant we've chosen, HNTB, they are going to complete this study in the next six months before the end of the year. So that, as you said, the next administration and also the members of the General Assembly will have all the data, the analytics, everything that kind of goes into this option. And it's a funding option that many states around us are looking at. So Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania have done similar studies. Several of the southern states are looking at this type of funding option for some of their expansion projects in the future. So we thought it would be good government for the senior management team and Director Boratun to look at this now and then have that data analytics available for the next administration and also for the members of the General Assembly as you look at the next transportation budget and also the next operating budget.
Follow-up. Yes. It's at least possible, if not likely, that the next governor may have their own folks to run the Ohio Department of Transportation. Why should they be saddled with the outgoing administration's, what I'll call kind of pre-baked study that says you need to put tolls on Ohio's roads?
And through the president to the representative, when I said we did narrow the scope of this study, we are only looking at the choice lanes. And there are several states. The state of Tennessee is actually looking at a project on Interstate 24 for a 26-mile section of that interstate to look at choice lanes. And these are lanes that are parallel to current lanes, and drivers would have the option, if they would like to, to kind of drive on that portion of the lane, and that they'd be charged a small fee for that convenience. And we're also looking at just the heavily congested areas, and so it would be specific. So we're just looking. We don't have the data now. We don't have the knowledge. obviously there's tolling up on the Ohio Turnpike but for choice lanes we just don't have that type of data so this will answer a lot of the questions also into like what the technology is available for collecting those fees and so forth so we think it's valuable for the next administration and we'd be happy to share with members of the General Assembly as we collect that data going
forward. A tolling light study is still a tolling study.
Senator Serino?
I defer to Senator Wilkin first.
That's okay. Okay, Senator Wilkin? Thank you again, Mr. President. So I agree a lot with what Representative Stewart has mentioned. And I try not to do this because I think controlling board is supposed to be more of an overall look at things going on in the state of Ohio. But if I look at my district, I barely have four lanes, more or less the need to put in another lane. So I'm voting on something that has zero effect on my district. And I get it. The controlling board is a little broader than that. But that's one of my struggles. And the fact that we don't have much time to go and now we're going to have a study would be rather difficult.
Through the President to Senator Wilkin. Again, thank you for the question. And actually, it's a great question, because that is one advantage of the choice lanes, is that if there is an expansion project in a highly congested area, we'll say maybe on Interstate 71 here in central Ohio, that would actually free revenue and funding for road projects in other parts of the state, including the rural districts in your district.
Follow-up? Senator Ingram.
Thank you, Mr. President. We have been going back and forth about this, and you're right, there are other states that do have the choice lane. My question to you though, is this ARPA money still?
Through the Senate President to Senator Ingram. I'm not aware of this. I think this will be funded through the budget for our research and also through our research projects that we do on a consistent basis. But I'm not aware that it's our money.
Follow-up, Senator? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. But you had mentioned that, so I'm concerned with if it is, then there's a certain period of time in which it has to be spent. And so I'm trying to figure out what else, since you've already been appropriated those dollars, would you spend it on if it wasn't that kind of research?
Through the Senate president to Senator Ingram, this would just be for this research project. This would not impact any other construction projects or road maintenance or any other project. This would be just dedicated for a research-type project.
Mr. President, yeah, I get that. That makes me even more concerned that we're going to do 1.5, or what is it, 1.5 million to do this study, and we're not sure if you're using just your research dollars that are there to do what else. I mean, why are we doing the choice lane study when I'm sure there's other things we should be looking at through the Department of Transportation, like bridges that are in rural areas that need to be something else needs to be done.
Through the president to Senator Graham. I'll ask our staff. I'm not aware of what different projects could be used for this funding, but I know this is a priority for ODOT in that just it's, since so many other states are looking at this type of, there is a funding issue across the country with many states, and we thought this might be an option that we could look to the future and collect the data. It's just research. It's collecting the data analytics so that we can pass that along to the next administration and also to the members of the General Assembly.
Mr. President, may I ask, so didn't we have bus-only lanes and things like that at one point? Or did we attempt to do something like that? Maybe I'm traveling in some other state.
Through the President to the Senator, I'm not aware of that. but I can find out, and I'd be happy to...
Yeah, maybe that's what it is. Okay, all right.
Are there any further questions?
Senator Serino? Yes. Sorry, Mr. President. So I actually am kind of intrigued by this, as we discussed previously by this, but I do think that Representative Chairman Stewart makes a good point in, you know, let's let the next administration decide if this is a priority for them or not. I don't think this is as time-sensitive as some other projects are. So, Mr. President, I move that we defer.
We have a motion to defer. Do we have a second? Second.
We have a second from Representative Stewart.
Hearing any objections? Item is deferred. I believe that was our last item. Okay, with no further business before the board, is there a motion to adjourn?
Motion from Representative Stewart, a second.
Second from Senator Serino.
Any objection? Hearing none, we are adjourned.