March 17, 2026 · Arts, Athletics and Tourism Committee · 11,338 words · 11 speakers · 94 segments
I'll call this meeting of the Arts, Athletics, and Tourism Committee to order. I'd like to invite you all to please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Clerk, would you please call the roll? Chair Miller? Here. Vice Chair Heiner? Here.
Ranking Member Jarrells?
Here.
Representative Dieter?
Here. Representative Gambari? Present. Representative Grimm? Checked in.
Representative Larray?
Checked in.
Representative Matthews?
Here. Representative McNally is excused.
Representative Rob Laysdale?
Here. Representative Swearengin? Here.
Representative Thomas.
Representative Upchurch. With the quorum being present, we will proceed this afternoon as a full committee. Members, I'd like to ask you to please take a look at the iPads to view the minutes from the previous meeting on March 10, 2026. Are there any objections to the minutes? All right, without objection, the minutes are approved. And happy St. Patrick's Day to everybody. It's so lovely to see everybody in their different variations of the St. Paddy's Day green. All right. At this time, we will begin our testimonies. I'd like to now bring forward House Bill 732 for its second hearing, and I'd like to recognize Todd Kleismitt,
the Executive Director of the America 250 Ohio Commission for Proponent Testimony.
Welcome, Todd. It's a pleasure to have you today.
Great. Great to be here. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman Miller and Vice Chair Heiner, Ranking Member Jerrolds, and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to be with you today to testify in support of House Bill 732, which will create a new Ohio the Heart of it All Pass program administered by Tourism Ohio. My name is Todd Kleismitt. I serve as the Executive Director of the America 250 Ohio Commission. As you know, we are charged with leading Ohio's participation in the nation's 250th anniversary, which is happening right now all across the country. Let me begin by emphasizing how much I appreciate the enthusiasm and support of this initiative that you, Madam Chair, have brought to this initiative that has led to this Ohio the Heart of it all pass. Much appreciated. The timing of this Ohio the Heart of it all pass is not random, of course. The year 2026 is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for all of us to come together to showcase Ohio's revolutionary ties, and it is also a time to spotlight what Ohio and Ohioans have contributed to the United States these past 250-plus years. Ohio truly is the heart of it all, and I am confident that everyone in this room and anyone watching us now is rightly proud of these amazing tourism assets that are all across our great state. Others have pointed out that Ohio's tourism industry accounts for $57 billion annually. That is tremendous, and I'd like to think that we're poised for even more growth during this landmark anniversary year of 2026. If House Bill 732 can be passed quickly, we can capitalize on this opportunity. Our top tourist attractions have a lot of incredible experiences to market to consumers. Our smaller market tourism assets also have an abundance of experiences and stories in Ohio pride to offer to the public What I especially love about the Ohio the Heart of It All Pass is that it is voluntary and flexible for those tourism sites whether they are big or small, to make their own determinations about how best to use and opt into the program. I think we will learn a great deal during this introductory phase in 2026 to make it a reliable tool in the toolkit for Ohio's tourism partners who work so hard to make Ohio such a vital player within a very competitive tourism marketplace. I'm excited about 2026 and Ohio's ability to shine during this nation's 250th anniversary this tourism season. House Bill 732 will help both Ohioans and out-of-state visitors recognize that Ohio truly is the heart of it all when it comes to offering a diverse range of experiences, fun, and meaningful engagement of all kinds. I want to thank the sponsors and this committee for embracing Ohio's arts, athletics, and tourism opportunities. We applaud the work that you are doing. I also would like to thank our partners at Tourism Ohio who are charged with administering this program. Tourism Ohio's director, Sarah Wickham, serves on our America 250 Ohio Commission, and she and her team are simply sensational. I also thank them for their sense of collaboration on this and all that they do for Ohio. So thank you for giving me a couple of minutes to share my perspective with you today, and I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have of me. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Todd. It's such a pleasure to have you today. Are there any questions for the witness? We can't let you go off that easy. So I'm going to ask you a question. Todd, I appreciate you and the committee and the staff for all the work that you have done to organize these unique experiences in celebration of America's 250th birthday. I know there are so many different themes and it's such a broad, so many broad things that you've put together from the movies to the trails to the history experience at the Ohio History Connection. What have you found? I don't know if you can speak from personal experience or from as you've been out and about to all 88 counties. Is there something that you're seeing that Ohioans are especially excited about that the committee has prepared? Has it been the trails? Just curious to know maybe what that feedback has been.
Sure. Yes. And to the chair, thank you for the question. Yeah, for me personally, it is so rewarding to see that Ohioans all across the state are really embracing this. So that's really exciting. We have all 88 counties participating in one way, shape, or form. And lots of different ways, too. So I think the wide variety of things that are being offered, you know, we have our touch points to the American Revolutionary era. We have an American Revolutionary War fort. We have more than 7,000 Revolutionary War veterans buried in Ohio. And then we also had this huge opportunity to really tout what Ohio and Ohioans have contributed. And so that gives us a wide range of things to talk about in all of those 88 counties. So you meant like Ohio Goes to the Movies, 250-day film festival, if you will, venues in all 88 counties participating in that. It all started with Thomas Edison and his inventions, born in Milan, Ohio, right there off of U.S. Route 250, by the way. So there's a lot of different ways to come at this, and I think that's what's really been so helpful, I think, to our partners at the local level There not one or two ways to plug in There probably dozens of ways And we also gathering input from the communities that are along U Route 250 including Ashland County of course Lots of different touch points to the revolution, lots of fun ways to cross-collaborate. So there is an abundance of things. And of course, on July 4th, there's going to be probably hundreds of events happening just in Ohio. and then think about all the events that will be happening across the country. No shortage of opportunities. We have an events calendar on our website, America250Ohio.org. You can see, I think I was told recently that there's like 900 different events listed just here in Ohio. So we're coming at it from a quantity standpoint and a quality standpoint. So much to do. It's a big year.
That's very exciting. Very, very excellent. I appreciate that thorough overview. And truly, there really is something for all Ohioans and even outside visitors that are coming to our state as well. I want to ask you one more question, and then Representative Gambari also has a question for you. What do you see as the potential benefit of creating this one-of-a-kind pass that we have this opportunity as a committee and as a legislature body to build off this momentum and excitement with all the work that your commission has been doing? What do you see are some of the long-term benefits for the tourism economy to the state of Ohio?
So, Madam Chair, I think that one of the biggest things I can point to is that this is a great expression of the support that the state, the Ohio General Assembly, is showing that it really values these tourism assets that are, you know, they're not brand new. They've been, you know, producing a lot of value to the state, $57 billion annually.
That's amazing.
And so I think the ability for the General Assembly to send that signal and for Tourism Ohio to help package all these things together and opt in, you know, you can make it what you want at the local level. If you're a historic site or a museum or some other cultural institution, you can kind of join this effort in a way that works for you. The state will help market this big opportunity. and to kick it off in 2026, we think is just so perfect for the obvious reasons. So I think, you know, moving ahead in 2027, I think we'll have an opportunity to learn from the supply and demand that we see happening when this gets introduced, hopefully this summer. So a lot we'll learn, but I think this is just a great way to help market the state in so many different ways to Ohioans and for those outside visitors who we really want to come to Ohio.
Excellent. Thank you. Representative Gambari. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your testimony. Two questions. The first question is, will the Heart of It All Pass program include fast-track to this committee for people to come and see the committee process?
So, to the Chair and to Representative Konbari, I think it's up to the committee how you want to embrace this, and we can all work together to really showcase Ohio in whatever way works for all of you back in your district. This definitely needs to be on the stop, but to my serious question.
Is there any thought about any kind of reciprocity with other states that may have tourism passes to encourage people not just to obviously come and visit Ohio, but for Ohioans to visit other states throughout the country that are hosting their own events in their states, or any kind of reciprocity with programs I think like the federal park systems do programs for military and first responders
I know the proposed legislation includes the first year passed being free, subsequent fees to be determined with Ohioans receiving a discounted rate.
But I'd be interested in finding out ways that we can encourage Ohioans to go visit other parts of our nation and learn about history from those areas as folks from those states then come here.
So, Madam Chair and Representative Ganbari, I think that's a great thing to explore. I personally don't think I'm aware of any discussions at this early stage, but I think as we get this introduced this summer and learn from what other states are doing, especially in this 250th anniversary year, I think that has great potential moving ahead. But I'm afraid I don't know any, I can't think of any other efforts going on outside of Ohio that are just like this. But there probably are similar conversations happening in our neighboring states. It would be a great thing, I think, for us to explore.
Thank you. Thank you for the question. Are there any other questions for Todd? All right, Todd, thank you so much for coming in. We really appreciate you and all the work you're doing.
Thanks so much.
Thank you. Members, I want to also draw your attention to the tablets. We have two additional written testimonies, one from Rebecca Osmo with the Ohio Humanities and Johanna with the Ohio Museums Association. So if you could please make sure that you read those, that would be appreciated. And this concludes the second hearing for House Bill 732. Now I'd like to bring forward House Bill 697 for its third hearing, And I'd like to recognize Mark Kosky, a board member at NFHS Network for opponent testimony. And Mark is in place of David here today. Thank you for filling in. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Miller, Vice Chair Heiner, Ranking Member of Gerald's and Member of the House Arts, Athletics and Tourism Committee.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in opposition of House Bill 697. My name is Mark Kosky. I serve as the vice president of the NFHS Network and as chief marketing officer at the National Federation of State High School Associations. The NFHS is based out of Indianapolis. On a personal level, I'm proud to say I grew up in Fairborn, Ohio, so it's always great to be home. In the event that you're not familiar with the NFHS Network, let me provide some brief context. The NFHS Network was created 13 years ago by three parties. The NFHS, which is the National Organizing Body for High School Athletics and Performing Arts. It's 51 member state associations, in which the OHSAA is one, and play on sports. The NFHS network produces and distributes live and on-demand high school events to fans across the country through a video streaming platform. This service was created by its partners in order to advance the mission of education-based athletics, expanding access to high school sports for students, families, and committees. Communities, I apologize. In Ohio, that work is done in partnership with the Ohio High School Athletic Association and its member schools. Since 2020, the NFHS network has operated under a post-season rights agreement with the OHSAA. Under that agreement, the OHSAA receives a guaranteed annual rights fee, a revenue share, a comprehensive statewide coverage across all sports and all levels of championship competition, and a partner that is committed to adhering to OHSAA's mission and values. Since the agreement began, the NFHS network has broadcast more than 5,000 OHSAA postseason events. The OHSA and its member schools have borne none of these production costs or distribution costs. The current agreement between the NFHS Network and the OHSA has 10 years remaining. The legal right for state associations to enter into exclusive broadcast agreements has been affirmed by the courts. The Seventh Circuit 2011 decision in Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association v. Gannett confirmed that athletic associations like the OHSAA have the right to enter into exclusive agreements with a service provider. The proposed litigation, I'm sorry, the proposed legislation of House Bill 697 would introduce government interference into commercial contracts between private entities. The contract between the OHSAA and the NFHS network is both legally sound and operationally beneficial. The investment behind this partnership is substantial, benefiting both state association and individual high schools, with more than $130 million in incremental revenue distributed directly to those entities. In Ohio alone, the NFHS network has installed more than 390 pixel-aught automated video production solutions in Ohio schools. Approximately 85% of these systems were provided at no cost to schools, representing more than $2 million in equipment investment. This investment has allowed more than 93,000 Ohio high school regular season games to be broadcast on the NFHS network. This is not a selective or short-term commitment. It is a long-term investment to expand access to every school, every sport, and every student-athlete, not just the popular programs. Let me highlight a few of the issues that the proposed legislation would create. First, House Bill 697 would create significant operational problems at the local level. Most venues that host postseason events do not have the space, staffing, or technical infrastructure to accommodate multiple broadcast crews. Requiring the OHSAA and its schools to manage that kind of logistical complexity imposes unnecessary financial and administrative burdens on local educators and event administrators. People whose attention should remain on the student-athletes and running a safe, ordinary competition. House Bill 697 would also undermine the goal of broadcasting coverage of high school sports to serve all schools, all sports, and all student-athletes, not just the events that drag the biggest audience. The current statewide agreement between the OHSAA and the NFHS network provides consistent across the full postseason from championship matchups to early round contests from large suburban schools to small rural schools from headline sports to those that receive far less commercial attention Conversely, the bill would open the door to outside entities to cherry pick the highest profile events, the big schools, the popular sports, the championship finals, while leaving the rest uncovered. That approach increases the disparity between the haves and the have-nots from both a coverage and revenue standpoint. Our collective goal should be to expand coverage of high school sports across all sports, all schools, and all student-athletes. This bill works against that goal. I want to be clear. This is not an argument against local broadcasters or important role that they play in our communities. They are very important to our community. The NFHS network regularly works with local media entities to accommodate requests for live video coverage of post-season events, both on a case-by-case basis and through ongoing partnerships. It is also worth noting that the existing agreements that the OHSA has with Spectrum and the NFHS do not restrict audio broadcasts or journalistic coverage of postseason events. Traditional radio, internet, audio streaming, photography, news articles, the social media coverage has always remained available to local outlets. It is important to note that there are thousands of postseason events in Ohio, and we simply cannot produce live video streaming for all of them. When that happens, the rights return to the OHSAA, which makes them available to local entities through a managed and orderly process. There are plenty of existing operations for local media to cover postseason high school events in Ohio. Passage of House Bill 697 is the wrong remedy, while other commercial solutions are available. OHSA has partnerships and contracts in place to expand coverage, return real value to schools, support local media requests when possible, and keep the focus where it belongs on the students, schools, and mission of education-based athletics. For those reasons and continual equitable promotion of interscholastic athletics in Ohio, for the betterment of all students of Ohio, the NFHS network respectfully asks for this committee to oppose House Bill 697. Thank you for the time and consideration. I'm happy to answer
questions. Thank you for coming in and testifying, Mark. I do need to ask before committee is finished today, I'll need you to complete a witness slip so we can have that for the record, if you may. Thank you. Are there any questions for the witness? Okay, Vice Chair Heiner has a question for you. Hey, Mark, thanks for coming and testifying today. Thank you. So I've got to do a little setup first before I can ask the question. Sure. So your company's got a – you do provide the same service in the state of New York. And New York's version of OHSAA is a public entity, whereas OHSAA is a private entity. How does the contract bidding process differ between those two states? Is there a public request for proposal in New York? And how did you come about
obtaining your contract here in Ohio I appreciate that question you know when it comes to the NFHS network 51 state associations have the opportunity to join the network okay 50 states plus D Every state makes their own decisions in regards to if they want to be a part of the NFHS network. We currently have 46 of our 51 state associations that are part of the NFHS network itself. Every state decides if they want to go through a bid process, if they're not required to be a part of the process at all, and it's up to them. A lot of states do go through a bid process, and they might have a TV contract with Spectrum. As an example, then we would be like tier two rights. And so in New York specifically, since you brought that up, for a number of years they had an agreement with Spectrum, and then those rights actually folded over to the NFHS network. So I don't know if that helps.
Follow-up. So did you assume Spectrum's contract, or did it just end and then you bid your own contract, picked up where they left off? Yeah, I appreciate that.
So we made an agreement with Spectrum, and that agreement was to assume those rights a few years ago, And now New York is entirely with the NFHS network.
Okay. Thank you. Other questions? Representative Thomas.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you so much for coming in today. I think you touched on it in your testimony, but I just want to maybe clarify. So if you are a student, I was in speech class in high school, did kind of marketing different things. We would do some of these games. Way back then, streaming wasn't a thing. Now it is. So if you're a student class, for example, group, and you do streaming, you do broadcasting of these games, is it my understanding and what I heard was that the student groups could still do audio broadcasting for the tournament games, but because of your contract, they could not do their traditional streaming video broadcasting as they had done.
Is that accurate? I appreciate that question. So when it comes to the NFHS network, when we were formed in 2013, it was on the basis of student-led broadcast. And so we are all in support with students' broadcasting. We believe that's part of, that's how the network was created. With that said, what we've done is when students want to broadcast post-season events, then we want to actually work with those students because we want to give them that opportunity. And so what we do is we give them that opportunity. Now, one of the crews that we might have hired, we would send to a different game. So we would work with that student-led broadcast to broadcast those games on the NFHS network for the NFHS network. If it is a postseason game, that broadcast would go to the NFHS network and not to maybe the school's channel, so to speak. That might be where you're going. But we would never not want students to broadcast our games that are so precious, and we believe that's part of the experience of high schools, to broadcast those games, but then help the NFHS network, put it on the NFHS network, and showcase their talents worldwide.
Follow-up? Thank you, Chair. Thank you for that. That's helpful. So I guess what I heard from that is essentially you try to work with the high school the student group if they wish to continue their broadcast essentially you almost hire them to be your boots on the ground to showcase that Two, I guess, part question. One, is that the default? Do you automatically, essentially, if the school wishes, my understanding is the high school couldn't stop you from essentially contracting for their tournament game. So is that the default if there is a student class? And I guess the second part to that question is I struggle a little bit with that. The taxpayers have already paid for the class, paid for all those different pieces, and you're essentially profiting off of that. So I guess walk me through how does then that media class, outside of just the pure experience, benefit from that type of contract and then subcontracting from you?
Yeah, thank you. The NFHS network, I should start with, the NFHS is a student organization. We support 12 million students every year, and that's very important to us. School broadcast programs are very important to us. With that said, for postseason rights, so how it's structured here in Ohio, and it's a little different. So of the 46 state associations that are part of the NFHS network, Ohio's a little different because we do have a, the OHSA has a contract with Spectrum. They have first choice of all postseason games, and you'll hear from them shortly. We are the second choice. So after Spectrum might choose not to produce a game, then it comes to the NFHS network. If we have a student-led broadcast at that particular school that wants to host a game, then we would want them to do it. That would be our number one. We would not send a crew in there. We would not pay a crew. We would rely upon those students. And we have worked with many different teachers who manage the school broadcast program that in turn would have them produce that game for us. However, it would be on the NFHS network, to your point. And, you know, we have the exclusive rights when it comes to, you know, these games. Because of the millions of dollars that we have put back into the OHSA for the cameras that I mentioned that are very important to schools. because ultimately schools are making the dollars when it comes to regular season contests. Again, these cameras were put in free or it's on the network from their school broadcast program. Schools are making those dollars back. Realize the NFHS is a nonprofit organization. The NFHS network is a for-profit. So we have two entities, and I wear two hats. One is the Chief Marketing Officer for the NFHS and Vice President for the network. With that said, to answer your question, and hopefully I'm there, that we, again, want those students to broadcast those games, however it would be on the NFHS network, to get experience. And then we've worked with those schools to pay them so that the dollars can go back into their school as they see fit for the broadcasting class and so on.
Does that help, Representative? Thank you for the question.
Thank you. Are there any additional questions for the witness? All right, thank you very much, Mark. We appreciate you coming today. Thank you. All right, now I would like to recognize Jason Feaster,
the Vice President of Spectrum News
with Charter Communications for opponent testimony. Welcome to committee.
Thanks. Chair Miller, Vice Chair Heiner, Ranking Member Gerrolds and members of the committee, I thank you so much for the opportunity to testify this afternoon. My name is Jason Feaster, and on behalf of Charter Communications, we have 2.8 million customers in Ohio and 6,500 employees, and it is the parent company of Spectrum and Spectrum News One. We respectfully oppose House Bill 697 and are here to talk about that today. Our commitment to high school sports spans decades here in Ohio. Long before widespread coverage existed, we helped build and fund the platforms that bring these games to communities across the state. Before 2020, actually, you can believe that, live broadcasts of regular season football games were actually not permitted here in Ohio. We worked extensively with schools and the OHSAA to reasonably expand access. That effort helped create today's environment where thousands of games are available each year across multiple platforms, as you've heard today. We support the openness, especially in regular season. where broad participation makes a ton of sense. The postseason, however, is a bit different. It's fundamentally different, actually. Playoff games and championships carry the highest stakes, and they require a consistent statewide standard of coverage. Without a centralized partner-like spectrum, coverage becomes uneven and unpredictable. One school may have a local broadcaster, but they're playing against a team that doesn't, leaving gaps in access, gaps in storytelling to repeat each round. Much like neutral sites, they ensure competitive fairness on the field, and a statewide media partner ensures fairness and consistency in our coverage. Spectrum's longstanding partnership with the OHSAA reflects that model. We invest in professional production, technology, and experienced teams to deliver neutral, high-quality broadcasts that serve both communities equally while incorporating local voices when appropriate. This ensures that every single game, regardless of location or school size, is represented and presented at the same standard and reaches audiences across the state. Our technology is regularly used to assist officials with replays as well. This is an important piece. Many other smaller game productions don't do that and don't have that ability. So it's important in decision-making to get it right, especially at state semifinals and the championship-level games. Our replay technology has also helped when athletes have medical issues. I've witnessed personally when a player collapsed on the field on a basketball court, and in both those instances and several other instances, our replay technology actually helped the first responders come in and identify what happened. In the case of the athlete that fell on the court, she collapsed. No one knew what happened, but we were able to pull that video quickly up, and the first responder was able to understand exactly what happened there. So it's important to talk about the technology that we apply to our technology and our games. House Bill 697 would disrupt that system. actually represents unnecessary government intervention into private contracts, undermines the economic model that supports high-quality production, and creates operational and logistical challenges at already constrained venues. Additionally, its broad definition of broadcast introduces uncertainty around streaming and digital rights, further complicating, as you guys already are aware, a very complicated and complex media landscape. Most importantly, removing exclusive rights reduces the incentive for long-term investment in statewide coverage that risked fragmenting broadcasts, lowering production quality, and ultimately diminishing the experience for student-athletes, families, and communities. Our goal has always been very, very simple. Tell the best stories to the widest audience and ensure that every Ohio community sees itself reflected in a statewide stage. The current model achieves that. for these reasons, we respectfully urge the committee to reject House Bill 697.
Thank you for the opportunity Okay Thank you for your testimony Jason Are there any questions for our witness I would like to ask a question. I just want to push back a little bit on your testimony, just above point number five. That's bolded. The result is less investment and lower production quality. Many of the local broadcasters have very high quality production as well and are investing in the schools with maybe scholarships or different benefits and perks. I am curious what type of benefits are you providing the schools that are in contract? Are you providing scholarships or any type of other? What are some of the benefits that you're providing as you're taking over in that postseason time?
Thank you. Madam Chair, a couple examples of that. We have historically, we have provided scholarships to student athletes across the state in all different sports, both boys and girls. Our commitment goes through the OHSA and then the OHSA distributes funding to the schools. That's the direct sort of connection there. We also provide opportunities, as you heard earlier, we do the same thing. We work with student productions. It's a little different because ours are larger productions and have full production truck capabilities. So we oftentimes will have a broadcasting club or a student class that comes and they actually They either can participate with us, we can use them as part of the crews. Because of our issues, they can't run cameras and do those things in our productions, but they can witness it and participate in it. And we see that as an educational opportunity for folks because a lot of folks are aspiring to be in media and sports media. It's a big thing these days. And so for those students to come on and have an opportunity to walk around, see how production works, be in the production truck, sit with the director, it's a good opportunity for them.
I'm just curious. I'm just going to throw this out maybe to the committee and to you. I know you'll have to talk with some of your folks as well. I think about just that some of the local broadcasters are so invested. They know the names of the kids. They know the families. They know the history. They know the story. There's those personal touch points at that local level. If we were able to still honor what you have for your contracting exclusive rights, but provide maybe a carve-out for those local broadcasters that have been invested, have invested dollars, have invested scholarships to provide a carve-out for some of those local broadcasters? Would that be something that you and the others might be open to?
I thought I would just throw that out there on the table. It's a great point. So we've always been open to broadcasters and local hometown productions. And those are not necessarily broadcasters. There's folks who are streaming, there's radio stations, there's a couple other businesses that are out there that just do high school games and produce games. So we've always been open to that. Again, it's been laid out. There's a tiering system, right? So there's certain games that get selected for statewide. Then there's the NFHS piece, and then those that are unselected then fall back to the broadcasters. Broadcasters still have the opportunity to do audio feeds all the way through the state championships, and that's actually celebrated, to your point. And it's very much appreciated. Just like you asked my name and you wanted to get my name corrected, I appreciate that. our broadcasters make the same effort when they talk to the local broadcasters, right? There's relationships there. Some of our announcers know some of the other announcers. Those other announcers also sometimes participate in our broadcast. So there is a relationship that exists there. In some cases, we have also distributed on a streaming platform some of those other broadcasts from local broadcasters to local partners. So there is a relationship that exists there today. I think as we've heard today and as the OHSA might lay out, there's a structure for the process. And I think that laid out in the current media regulations and process and rules I think for us it like how does that all come together within our rights I understand Thank you Are there any other questions
Okay, I appreciate you coming today, Jason. Thank you so much for your testimony. Next, we'd like to recognize Doug Ute, the Executive Director for the Ohio High School Athletic Association for opponent testimony. Welcome to committee.
Good afternoon. Just for clarification, that's Ute. I'll share that in here, but that's fine. Chairman Miller, Vice Chair Heiner, Ranking Member Jarrells, and members of the House Arts, Athletic and Tourism Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding House Bill 697. My name is Doug Ute, and I'm the Executive Director of the Ohio High School Athletic Association. I'll also say I'm joined by Mr. Tim Streed, who is Director of our Media Relations, as well to assist with any questions you may have. By way of background, the OHSA is a private, non-profit voluntary association comprised of 815 member high schools and approximately 750 member 7th and 8th grade schools. All of Ohio's public schools are members, along with approximately 20% chartered non-public schools. Our policies are approved by our membership and governed by our representative board, reflecting the diversity of Ohio schools. The policy which brings us here today relates to our broadcasting agreements. To begin, I think it's incredibly important to clarify some important information about our broadcasting agreements. Live audio broadcasts are always permitted, regardless of video coverage situations. In some cases, radio stations are unable to broadcast games because they're not selected as the first or second designated station by our member schools, not because the OHSAA prohibits them. Spectrum is OHSAA's first broadcast partner. They cover postseason football and basketball games, along with selected regular season football games each week for TV and streaming coverage. If Spectrum covers a game, no other live video broadcasts are permitted. If Spectrum is televising a game, delayed video broadcasts are not permitted. If Spectrum is streaming, not televising a game, delayed video broadcasts may be permitted if the facility can accommodate additional broadcast crews. After Spectrum makes its selections, the NFHS network has the option to select additional games to video broadcast. If the NFHS network covers a game, no other live video broadcasts are permitted.
Delayed video broadcasts are permitted for NFHS network games if the facility can accommodate the additional crews. It's important to emphasize that the OHSA works closely with local broadcast teams and encourages schools to accommodate coverage whenever possible. Our goal has always been to balance broad access for fans with practical realities of event production and the contractual obligations necessary to sustain those broadcasts. As a private nonprofit organization, the OHSA enters into agreements with partners such as Spectrum and the NFHS Network because they commit substantial resources to producing high-quality broadcasts. broadcast. These investments include production crews, specialized equipment, transmission infrastructure facilities marketing administrative support In exchange for that investment these partners received defined broadcast rights The revenue generated through these agreements supports the OHSAA statewide tournament structure, student-athlete programs, and services provided to our member schools. Without the ability to enter into exclusive agreements that protect broadcast rights, it becomes far more difficult for partners to justify the financial investment required to produce these events. Beyond the financial consideration, these partnerships also provide something equally important, consistent, high-quality coverage of high school athletics across the state of Ohio. Through these agreements, student athletes and their schools receive professional-level exposure, and families and fans across the state are able to watch OSSA championship events. High school athletics are a vital part of the community life throughout Ohio. The current broadcast model allows those events to reach broadcast audiences while also generating resources that help sustain education-based athletics. Maintaining the flexibility to enter into exclusive broadcast agreements is essential to preserving that model. We appreciate the committee's attention to this information as you consider this bill and welcome continued collaboration to ensure Ohio maintains an education-based model of athletics. Thank you for your consideration. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.
Thank you for your testimony, Doug. Representative Gumbari has a question. Thank you, Madam Chair. As I've been listening to the testimony, I've just had a couple questions that I've been kind of formulating a little bit, so just bear with me as I explain my question, if you don't mind. And obviously you have to have athletes in order to have your business model work or the business model of a TV crew or production crew to come in, video something. Most people will probably, I would argue, probably tune in to a team that is maybe doing very well. Maybe they've got an undefeated streak or they're doing well before they even get to the state tournament. You're probably going to have more people tune in to watch that than maybe a team that's struggling a little bit, right? So how does that impact whether those games get covered, right? So if a team isn't doing so well, are you still going to have resources, or will the production crew still have resources to go broadcast those games, or will those resources be allocated and production crews be allocated maybe to a team that is doing better? And if they're not going to cover a team that's struggling, then is there an opportunity to maybe open that up to still make sure that those games are being covered, maybe for the family or the fan base, even if it's not as in demand as a team that's on a hot streak? Does my question make sense, sir?
Yeah, it does, I think. Okay, thank you. Madam Chair, to Representative, I do think I know where you're at with that and absolutely does. The broadness of it is the Spectrum selects their games. The Federation selects theirs. and Mr. Kosky could certainly answer that a lot more. Maybe Tim could answer that. So Spectrum only selects a – when we talk about the number of events that we have in Ohio, and Spectrum selects their events, very few of them, and then the Federation steps in, and there are hundreds of games. And that second part, whether you're 0-8, playing an 0-8 in football, you still get that opportunity from the Federation to show that Friday night football game. Is that where you were going with that?
Thank you. I think so. I guess I'm just trying to get an understanding of, you know, pardon the adage, but it sounds like there's enough in the sandbox for everybody to play in the sandbox, right? So I just want to make sure that, you know, as we go forward that maybe some school districts aren't unfairly treated or maybe some smaller broadcasting companies that maybe don't have a as well-versed production crew or as well-versed resources still have an opportunity to be part of delivering those local sports to those communities without being big-footed by a bigger company. that has more resources, if that makes sense.
It does. Through Madam Chair, to the representative, I'll ask Mr. Street maybe to step in. If I may. Thank you. I think one thing to stress is that the regular season is very different from the postseason tournament, and we're just talking about the postseason tournament. Certainly teams of all abilities and all records get covered by their local media during the regular season. A team that's struggling, as you said, or not doing well, not to be cute, but they're not going to be in the tournament very long. So those resources are going to be allocated to the teams that obviously are advancing because we're involved in the tournament.
Do you have a follow-up? No follow-up, maybe just a little friendly remark. I've been gone for a couple weeks, and some people think committees are boring, but someone's watching on the Ohio channel because they just texted me, and they said, you're back. So you never have any clue who's going to be watching. I was gone on military duty, just for the record. but you have no clue who's going to be watching Friday Night Football or Tuesday afternoon committee here at the Statehouse. There's a really broad audience of people that watch broadcast for a variety of different purposes, whether to be educated or to enjoy. So to Tiffany, who's watching on the Ohio Channel, thanks for the text. I appreciate it. Representative Thomas has a question.
Thank you, Chair. Hopefully Tiffany enjoys this question, too. So you all are a private nonprofit, but you rely on the taxpayer investment for the public school side for your whole business model.
Well, without essentially the structure of the school, the business model wouldn't exist.
And so I guess I'm struggling a little bit with, I can understand for your 20% members who are chartered private or are non-public, I can understand having private contracts, non-public bidding, but for the other 80% that are the public school side who have all of this kind of in the public aspect, I guess walk me through how to justify using that public money, using the resources, but having no bid and having non-public contracts.
Through the Madam Chair to the representative. I think it's important to note that the OHSAA receives no state dollars. 85% of our revenue comes from butts in seats at tournament games. 10% of our revenue comes from corporate contracts. About 3% comes from officials' dues, and then 2% from other things. So, and what we do with our money at one point, you know, you can look back in early 2000, and at one point the association was losing 5 of its butts in seats a year for about 15 years COVID had kind of changed that a little bit model but we had one month cash on hand and five straight years of deficit spending The last six years, our goal was to have nine months rainy day fund, and we've had five straight years of operating in the black. Okay? Every dollar we receive above the nine months cash on hand for a rainy day fund goes right back to our schools. We've given back to our schools over $6 million in the last five years. And they come back. We give $200,000 in scholarships to $201,000 scholarships to our student athletes across Ohio each year. We give travel stipends back for regional and state tournament games. And then the last three years, every member school, whether you won a tournament game or won the state, two years ago or three years ago, every member school got a check for $1,250. Two years ago, every member school got a check for $2,000. and last year every member school got a check for $1,250 going back into our membership. So when you talk about a business model or for-profit, we think it's very important from a rainy day fund to have nine months' cash on hand to stay away from our membership, and we learned that at COVID. With one month's cash on hand, if we're a school district, and we always say we're more like schools than we're non-like schools, we'd have yard signs in our community asking for more money from the community. And so when you talk about our contracts and our models and things like that, that goes right back into our membership in that form. I hope that helps you.
Follow-up?
Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Yes, I'm still kind of wrapping my head. My dad's one of your officials.
So a little bit, no.
Thank him for that. I will. Mom's probably watching too. But I guess the boiled down answer to that then is essentially you have the private contracts, the no big contracts, as a means to essentially raise more revenue versus is your concern if you had those public, if you had the bidding process, would you be concerned that you wouldn't be able to bring in as much revenue for those?
Through Madam Chair, to the representative, absolutely, because when we're talking about keeping our events affordable, and we are a state, and our students, by doing these kind of things that we have in that 10%, our student price to get into tournament games up through the state tournament is $5. Probably, in most cases, less than it is on a regular season Friday night forum. And so we were able to keep our student prices at $5. through that. And so through our association with our private contracts, that helps us keep, we'd love to let everybody in for free, obviously. But these kind of things help us keep our ticket prices down. Because the one thing in Ohio that we're very happy with is that our tournaments are in big venues. And those big venues come with a cost. We just were in Dayton for basketball last weekend. Our hockey played right down the street at Nationwide, our state finals, and our wrestling was Ohio State University, and those come with a high cost, and I could share a lot more That be a whole day long thing on that but we want our kids in those type of venues and so we and they come at a high cost and we want to keep that price down and so that 10 of those corporate relationships we have are very important to us
Okay.
Thank you for taking the time to explain that. I was going to ask the question on how the proceeds of the contract are distributed among the member schools, but I think you did a really nice job of laying that out. and I guess I'm encouraged to see that you are giving back something to all of your member schools. I have two questions, or maybe it's just one, depending on how you answer the first one, if that's okay here. The decision of contracting with Spectrum and NFHS, was that a decision made by the board of OSHA,
or was it a decision made with the entire membership? Yeah. So, Madam Chair, our board, much like you, we have 850 member schools. Our principals are our voting members, and we're split up into six districts. And there are representative small, medium, and large-size schools, as well as middle school diversity. And so we have nine board members on each district that are elected by their membership to serve on that board and represent them. From those district boards, those nine come on our state board. And so our state board, when they approve a contract, they're representing our membership simply by the way we're structured in our Constitution. And so every year, Tim will present the media contracts and I shouldn't say contracts, media regulations, sorry, and our board votes on those. Okay. Thank you. That's very helpful. Thank you.
Are there any questions, additional questions? Vice Chair Heiner. Thanks for being here today and talking to us about this. I want to kind of follow up on her question. So these agreements that are in place, how did they come about originally? Was there a bidding process? Is there an opportunity for others to bid on these agreements? For example, Comcast and Armstrong are both cable operators in this state. Are they given an opportunity to participate in this? Have the broadcasters ever been given an opportunity to bid on this contract?
Through Madam Chair, to the representative, I'll answer the first part of that and then, Tim, because this is my sixth year and I walked in and inherited us. I think Tim can give you a better understanding of the history of those, but I will talk to anybody at any time about any of those things. I don't think we have anybody in Ohio. No one's approached me to do what the NFHS does for us. I've had one company approach us to do what Spectrum does, and that was a bid process, the last contract, and so nothing from there. But I'll let Tim give you a history. Thanks.
Thank you, Doug.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll give you the brief answer. Our exclusive TV contracts go back, as far as I've found, to the early 90s with ONN TV, when ONN TV existed. I have seen some information back to the 60s when our basketball state tournament was broadcast by Jimmy Crumb. There was a TV network at the time that did that. So ONN TV was one of the first TV companies I worked with and then that went into Sports Time Ohio in 2007 Time Warner Cable Sports Channel around 2008 and then Sports Time Ohio became Fox Sports Ohio And then it was right around COVID, Fox Sports Ohio left the OHSA, and we just have now the TV contract with Spectrum News 1.
Do you have a follow-up, Vice Chair? Okay. So is there, how would other parties know that these contracts are being bid? Is there a request for proposal put out? Is there some sort of a formal process, or is this just happening between two parties?
Thank you for the question, Madam Chair. The companies around the state, whether it's at state tournaments, informal conversations throughout the year, are always talking to us about our contracts, and not just television, but other contracts we have as well. It has been a little bit since we've sent out a formal request for proposal. I would say around COVID, it's the last time we sent out an official bid. But it's similar with our state championship venues, too. Football in Canton, basketball in Dayton, baseball in softball in Akron, for example. We're always talking to, it could be universities or cities, that have an interest in hosting our state championships. And it's the same on the broadcast side, too. We're always going to have that conversation with a media company that has interest in doing that. Thank you.
Tim, we will also need you to, if you would kindly, fill out a witness slip as well before we conclude committee. I have another question, and either one of you can answer. I want to follow up to your comments from the question from Representative Thomas. So question for you. Are you saying that having an open bidding process would result in getting a worse deal than having an exclusive deal?
Just wondering about that. Thank you for the question, Madam Chair. I don't think it would result in a worse deal. I think any conversation bears merit. And I think having, whether it's broadcasting, state championship venues, the more conversation, the better, is my opinion.
Okay, very good. All right, very good. And then maybe last question to round out our testimonies. Do you think that there's any value in having local broadcasters whose listeners are familiar with and who know the players broadcasting the playoffs?
Thank you for the question, Madam Chair. Immense value in local broadcasters. I can't state that enough. I grew up listening to Marion WMRN and Jeff Ruth call our games, and I could say a lot, but I'll skip to 2010 when we created the OHSA Radio Network. And the radio network broadcasts all the state championship games, but local broadcasters are always allowed to come in and call the games of their local teams, which is not the way it is in every state, but it is in Ohio. Madam Chair, if I could, I was also a school superintendent for 20 years, and so I saw the growth of our media programs at schools, and I'm really excited to hear Jason and Mark talk. Those two organizations talk about doing anything they can for students because I did see the growth of those programs. I was in Newark for 11 years, and they've got an awesome program of kids that go out and do things. And so we support that 1,000% in our association. Excellent.
Thank you very much. Are there any final questions for the witnesses? All right. Thank you very much, And we appreciate you coming today. And to the members, I want to remind you, if you take a look at your iPads, we do have an interested party written only testimony with the Ohio Chamber of Commerce from Justin Barnes. So please make sure you take a moment to be familiar with that testimony as well. And this concludes the third hearing for House Bill 697. Next, I would like to bring forward House Bill 255 for its third hearing, and I'd like to recognize Linda Logan. Is Linda here? Hi, Linda. She is the president and CEO of the Greater Columbus Sports Commission for Interested Party Testimony. Welcome to committee today.
Thank you all, and happy St. Patrick's Day. to Chair Miller, Vice Chair Heiner, Ranking Member Jerrells, and members of the Ohio House Arts, Athletic, and Tourism Committee. My name is Linda Logan, as mentioned, CEO and President of the Greater Columbus Sports Commission. I, along with my counterpart David Gilbert from the Greater Cleveland Sports Commission, are here today to offer interested party testimony for House Bill 255. Unfortunately, Mr. Gilbert was unable to join us today. Before I offer our specific concerns relative to this piece of legislation, I would like to thank Representatives Miller and Gerald for your continued efforts to highlight sports as a significant economy driver for the state of Ohio. We certainly share that vision. Over a decade ago, the Greater Columbus Sports Commission and the Greater Cleveland Sports Commission recognized that Ohio was at a significant competitive disadvantage when competing against other states for major sporting events. Working with this body, we established the Major Sports Event Grant Program, a tool that has become a model for how states can attract and secure the types of sporting events that draw thousands of visitors and add millions of dollars to our economy. Between this program and the tremendous strength of Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati Sports Commissions, and a dozen others around the state, Ohio is constantly and consistently one of the top states in the nation at attracting and hosting major sporting events. In large part due to this program, Ohio has become in many ways the envy of other states due to our ability to attract the most competitive sporting events in our state. The Major League Soccer All-Star Game, the Major League Baseball All-Star Game, the NHL All-Star Game, the NHL Draft, the LPGA Solheim Cup, and countless NCAA championships and U.S. Olympic qualifiers, including the Women's Final Four next year, events that have come to Ohio since that program was established. As someone who is constantly competing against my peers in places like Indianapolis, Dallas, Nashville, and Phoenix, and many others, I can tell you that any measure that compromises the integrity of our current program will cost Ohio the opportunity to compete for these events in the future, something that I'm sure this committee hopes to avoid. While we would surely celebrate sports, creating an Ohio Sports Commission could inevitably result in unnecessary pressure and conflict between a proven program that has been in place for over a decade and a new state commission with unclear mission These dueling functions will inevitably add cost confusion and uncertainty in our ability to continue relying on state support as we compete for world events In particular concern in House Bill 255 is the stated intent that this commission shall partner with stakeholders to attract and host sporting events. This language seems to supersede the role of local organizing committees, such as the Greater Columbus Sports Commission and establish the state as the host, a model that does not exist anywhere else in the U.S. Additionally, the idea of creating an Ohio Sports Commission fund is quite duplicative given the fact that the Sports Event Grant Fund has existed in Section 122.122 of the Code for over a decade. Under current law, funds for sporting events may only be applied towards an event after a rigorous and truly objective process is completed. If an event satisfies that requirement to qualify for funds, the local organizing committee shall receive support from the state. Under this bill, these funds may be transferred from this fund objective program currently in place and moved into this new program that has no such objective measures when determining how state funds could be allotted. Removing this objective process and replacing it with a body that has limited knowledge of how to compete for these events does not advance the position of Ohio. We do not need to fix a strong economic driver that is not broken. I want to be clear. We stand ready to work with the bill sponsors to identify ways for Ohio to continue its work and our wonderful track record to securing great wins for the state. Despite best intentions, unfortunately, this legislation will only muddy the water in increasing competitive space. If it's this body's desire to establish an Ohio Sports Commission, we ask that you consider how that will impact our current landscape, which is considered to be among the best in the country. Thank you for your time, and I'm ready to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you very much, Linda. We appreciate you coming today.
Ranking member Gerald has a question. Yes. Thank you so much, and thank you, Linda, so much for coming today. I really do appreciate it. I guess my first question, and just the level set, is how much money does the sport economy bring to Ohio? You know, really within the, if you've been thinking about Columbus and with the sports commission, we say that in our 20-year history, we brought in over a billion and a half dollars to our economy over that. We're coming up on our 25th anniversary. So we do some studies with Experience Columbus, our sister organization, with Longwoods International. So we would be happy to share some of that data that we do every two years. Just a follow-up?
I guess let's go beyond Columbus, like just a ballpark. How much money as a state in our sport economies do we bring and generate in Ohio? Yes, and so to Chair Miller and Representative Gerald, I would say that I don't have that number handy, but I certainly can get it from our counterparts. I know that it is something that is of interest to all of us. Yeah The reason why I brought it up is because that was the kind of the original question that led us to down the path of developing the Ohio Sport Commission because we really don have a full picture of what the sport economies bring to the state Places like Columbus and Cleveland are doing amazingly well but there are emerging sport economies in places like Coshocton and Ashtabula and other places that we really don't have a – there's not a sport commission in those places. And so I would love to work with you, one, to try to devise that.
But my question is, if we don't have the number today, and we've had sport commissions for the last decade, why can't we, why shouldn't we create a sport commission to really unpack some of these statewide trends that can inform the legislature on what we need to do as a body to make Ohio continue to be the best in the nation?
Through Representative Miller and I would say to Representative Gerald, I think there are ways to do that. I know that the state of Ohio works with Longwoods and also Oxford to do research every two years as well. So perhaps there are ways to then take that current data and drill down just to the sports side, because I think that that is a possibility. I know that it does go through the Department of Development and Tourism, so are there ways to add to that study? I think both the state and the city of Columbus, we do it every other year just because of the cost of doing that research. So is that a way that we could then drill down a little farther would be a recommendation?
And just a follow-up. So I want to go specifically on some of your testimony and maybe clear up some things, because we've worked on this bill for about four years now, and I appreciate you and other folks who have helped us narrate this and kind of get this right. We do have an intended purpose, right, because the first is to enhance the quality of life in the state through attraction, promotion, and development of national and international sports. There is a clearly defined mission for the commission. And so I saw in your testimony you said that there really wasn't. It was unclear. I guess the question I do have is this particular bill and commission is not replacing any of the regional sport commissions. So where is that fear coming from?
And I know that Mike Caputo is also here, but through Representative Miller to Representative Gerrolds, I would say that I just think that to not fix something that is not broken. And I think if you look around the state, there's a dozen or more communities that are doing a really good job. We have our national association. It's called Sports ETA, Sports Event and Tourism Association, that would tell you that we are one of the highest achievers around the state. And I don't know if Mike would like to say a few words. There you are. Sure. Happy to. Chair Miller, Representative General Zings, thank you for the question. Of course. I think that the overarching concern that we have with this particular piece of legislation is the duplicative nature of this new fund in relation to the fund that's in current law. There is language in this bill specifically that permits the new fund to receive transfers of funds from other funds And our concern is that the money that is currently resting within the major sports grant program would be transferred into a new fund with far less objectivity in terms of how those dollars would ultimately be allocated and deployed for various events. So that is where we think that there's significant overlap that is, in our minds, undermining the integrity of the existing program.
Just a follow-up. So this current bill draft, the one that we're looking at now, does not have anything to do with the establishment of a new fund. I mean, it doesn't have any – in fact, that was an older version of the bill. This particular bill that's currently at everyone's iPad, it basically says that the commission shall establish an emerging sport tourism fund, and they should work together to establish an emerging fund that would then be used and deployed in places where there isn't necessarily a sport commission. What am I missing when I'm looking at the current version of the bill where it's literally them establishing a new grant program to support emerging sport economies throughout the state, including funding source for the program? We're not even creating an actual fund yet. It's just the study of an established fund. What am I missing?
Through the chair to the representative, all we can go off of is the information on the website. And the website specifically has in the bill section 122.972 that establishes the Ohio Sports Commission fund. If there is a new version that the website is not reflecting, we would love to see that. Oh, those are just for, okay, I see now. Just as a follow-up. Basically, that money is just for the operations of the commission to meet. It's not necessarily creating a fund to be deployed to fund other particular projects. So I think that's the difference, because I know we took out that fund piece in previous versions of the bill. But that's all. Thank you. To the chair and to the representative, we don't believe that the language specifically delineates those two. The language that we read in the bill allows for this new fund to receive transfers from other state funds for the purpose of administering what this new section of the code enables. and if the new section of the code is enabling, among other things, attraction of sporting events, you can reasonably conclude that money will be transferred from an existing program, one that has been in place for over a decade, into a new fund without any, in our mind, real logical purpose. Thank you.
Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions? All right. We thank you so much for coming in. Appreciate your testimony. and we are committed to working with you. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anybody else here today that would like to testify? All right. This concludes the third hearing for House Bill 255. Seeing no other business, this does conclude the Arts, Athletics, and Tourism Committee.