April 27, 2026 · Ohio Controlling Board · 10,283 words · 14 speakers · 187 segments
Thank you, Senator. As our substitute member, seeing that all members are present, the Secretary will call the roll. Senator Chavez. Senator Wilkin. Senator Ingram. Representative Stewart. Representative Davila. Representative Sweeney. President DeSantis. The minutes of the previous meeting have been distributed. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? Motion by Senator Wilkin. Do we have a second? Second by Senator Ingram. With a motion and a second, are there any objections? Seeing no objections, the minutes are approved. We do have several announcements today. The first is related to item number 22 from the Office of Budget and Management has been amended to reduce the requested appropriation increase to $1,306,897.17. The second item is item 23, again from the Office of Budget and Management. It has been amended to establish appropriation for the Great American State Fair and remove the previously requested transfers. Item number 33 from the Department of Higher Education has been deferred at the request of the agency. And item number 47 from the Department of Natural Resources has been deferred at the request of the agency. Okay, moving on. We'll now poll the members for holds. Senator Chavez.
Yes, thank you. I'd like to hold 7, 9, 14, 19, 50, 53, and 62.
Thank you. Senator Wilkin.
Item number five, please.
Thank you.
Senator Ingram. I have five, thirty-seven, thirty-eight, fifty-nine, and sixty-one.
Okay, thank you.
Representative DeVilla? Mr. President, 5 and 22 as a group, although I suspect we'll see a lot on 5 already here.
Thank you.
Representative Stewart? 5 and 22, and did we say 33 is already deferred?
Okay.
And Representative Sweeney? I'd like to hold item 34 and item 38.
Okay, thank you. The secretary will now read the held items. Item number five, Central State University. Items numbers seven and nine, Columbus State Community College. Item 14, Miami University. Number 19, Washington State Community College. Number 22, the Office of Budget and Management. Number 34, the Department of Commerce. Number 37, the Department of Administrative Services. Number 38, the Department of Development. Numbers 50 and 53 the Department of Natural Resources Number 59 the Department of Education and Workforce number 61 the Department of Children and Youth number 62 the Department of Medicaid Okay, thank you. Is there a motion to approve all items not held by the board? By Senator Ingram, a second from Representative Stewart. Yes, ma'am.
I have, I held 38.
I don't have to hold it.
Can I draw that back?
Yes. Yes.
You want a left?
Okay, cool. That's right, she did. Sorry, you had. I'm sorry. All right, we have a motion and a second. Okay, are there any objections? With motion and a second, all items not held are approved. Representative for agencies of approved requests are free to leave quickly and quietly at this time. We ready? Okay, moving on to our first held item, number five, Central State University. Please go ahead.
Good afternoon, Ken Hunnell, Assistant CFO with the Department of Administrative Services. But for the last four or five months, I've been on assignment helping Central State University in their fiscal recovery. Happy to answer any questions today.
Senator Wood.
Thank you, Mr. President. Thanks for being here, and I received a call previously on this item, so I appreciate that. But considering everything we've had that's been going on, I did want to, I guess, as much as anything, give you guys a chance to explain exactly what's going on and maybe even a little bit of where we're at on this particular issue and hopefully light at the end of the tunnel of where we're headed. So not a specific question, but just some stuff for the record for us that are about to vote on it.
Sure. Thank you. Through the President, to the Senator, a little recap of what's kind of happened over the last six months or so I think is a good place to start for us. As you know, CSU was placed in Fiscal Watch in October of 2024. DAS stepped in and started providing some support to the university last fall around October-November time period. Our initial focus at the time was on facilities, and in particular life and safety for the students and related systems that go along with those buildings and key activities there. Kind of quickly after that, we expanded into finances, academics, and other key areas beginning in December of 2025. Immediately, we implemented a hiring freeze in December of 2025, and then a purchasing and a travel freeze in January of 2026. That purchasing and travel freeze included no purchases of goods or services except for health, safety, and student success or critical infrastructure needs. that purchasing and travel freeze has extended to date and will continue through the end of the calendar year at the least Non travel was also suspended And as I stated these fiscal controls will extend through the end of the calendar year A little bit on the facilities front where we've spent a great deal of time and some state capital dollars that were appropriated to the university, we have released about 85% of the capital funding that was available in this biennium. It's, you know, all of those projects are kind of either been completed or nearing completion. And those focus on things like improvements to the student center, residence, resident hall fire alarms, water sanitation, boilers, major infrastructure projects that the university needed to have done. We've also assisted in other areas, including collective bargaining our collective bargaining team has helped to facilitate and get over the finish line all three of the collective bargaining contracts that central state has all three were ratified by their respective unit unions in February and March of this year we've also done some work on the academic realignment front and this these will begin in the fall term so this coming fall 2026 from 36 to 22 degrees which allows us to kind of focus our resources the limited resources on some of the most in-demand programs especially in demand for Ohio's workforce a little bit more about the academic success we've seen improvement this year compared to last spring 26 26 reflects about 375 graduation applications, including 281 traditional students, meaning traditional on-campus full-time students, and that's up by more than 100 applicants since last year. So tremendous improvement there. You know, as part of the finances in the review, what we really tried to do was stabilize the operation and then kind of start to look at contracts that are existing, cost containment measures, cost reduction measures into the long term. And this Friday we'll be presenting a fiscal year 27 budget to the Board of Trustees for Central State University that represents about a 13% budget reduction for next fiscal year. Kind of said a lot. Maybe I'll pause there and see if there's follow-up.
Senator, follow-up?
Thank you, Mr. President. As this is a $7 million request, my understanding is that this is $7 million, but it's to be paid back. Is that correct? And if that is correct, do you have any idea what kind of time frame that would be on or if you think that's going to be a real possibility?
Through the President to the Senator, yes, $7 million is to be paid back. We've got a budget next year that is very conservative, very low, And the idea behind that is to allow Central State University to start to build a cash reserve, which is partly why we're here today. You know, a cash reserve hasn't been built in, and so we've had some real challenges triaging and navigating on the cash front. But a very reduced budget next year allows that reserve to be built with the anticipation, along with some other, you know, one-time monies that we're looking at through the sale of some agricultural properties and some other one-time funding sources. that we build a sufficient reserve in fiscal year 27 so that by fiscal year 28 we've built up to about 60 days worth of operating cash and can begin to make those repayments to your point it is a seven million dollars is is is a significant sum and so the repayment schedule would likely be at least several fiscal years probably five or six to have it fully repaid. Senator?
Thank you. Last one. I know kind of in the part of the way we got here, if my memory serves correct, we had some contractors that were paid but did not complete the work. and then I know we had some decisions made that I do not believe were authorized for free tuition and things like that. So if you can just give me, for everybody's knowledge here, what we're doing about that, and if we are holding those folks accountable, that will be it for me.
Through the president to the senator. Yeah, on both fronts. On the one where there may have been payments made and work not necessarily provided, that is in active litigation. I don't have, and I'm not involved in the active litigation, so I don't have much to describe there, other than it is still continuing and we are pursuing those. And then on the, you know, authorizing of services, perhaps without approval, you know, we're close to wrapping up the fiscal year 23 audit. And I don't want to speculate too far until we see that final auditor's report, but I would anticipate some accountability being called out in that report specifically.
Senator Ingram? Representative Stewart?
Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you for being here, and I understand you're with the state. You're not central state, and so my comments are directed at others. But, you know, I do think it's important to kind of recount how we got here. I mean, just since I've been on this controlling board, We've had, we've sort of robbed the capital appropriation, Peter, to pay basic necessity Paul, right? We had a capital appropriation that said, we're going to build a nursing facility. He said, no, no, no, we can't do that. We need that money to fix the sprinklers, right? And then we have DAS essentially taking over all of the most important admin functions of the university. We have, to my understanding, the Department of Higher Ed has kind of gone through its own budget and said, where can we find money to plug other holes at Central State? And now we're here saying, whoops, turns out we have $7 million worth of unpaid liabilities or judgments. And reading the memo, I don't know what settlements we're paying. Do you have some sense of what kind of settlements we're paying so that we don't wake up tomorrow and realize that we paid a settlement for a professor that was being inappropriate or something to that effect? I mean, do we have any idea what these are for?
Through the president to the representative, yes. So many of those are still in active litigation, and so I probably can't go into a ton of detail. Largely, though, resolved around reduction in workforce claims, as well as the prior example of payments made without work being done. and some counterclaims there. So I think we have a good handle, at least from the state perspective, on what those potential liabilities are. And I think as part of our expectations for, if approved here today with this funding, we would certainly be reporting those numbers back to the controlling board.
Just to seize on, follow up please, just to seize on reduction in workforce claims. Does that mean we are taking steps to reduce our workforce and when we do, Folks who are being reduced are suing the state, and now we're going to, the taxpayers are going to be on the hook to settle that claim?
Through the president to the representative. That is the case in at least one example from a prior reduction in workforce that happened in 2025. A relatively small dollar amount, we think, on that one. But again, until it's final, I don't have a specific dollar amount to give you there. On all other fronts where there's been some reduction, much more confidence that we don't have any liability on that. Did it the right way.
Okay. Follow up. Yes. $7 million at a time when we are digging in every couch cushion, not only at the department but at Central State. I understand. I appreciate your candor about, yeah, we're supposed to pay this back, but it may be a while. I mean, if the best case scenario that you've laid out is that in two years, we might have 60 days cash on hand to cover basic operating expenses, that ain't a great place to be anyway. So wouldn't it be fair to say that if in two years, the best we can hope for is Central State has 60 days of runway? we're not getting our $7 million back until a few more of my kids graduate and head to college. I mean, right? I mean, this is going to take quite a while.
Through the president, to the representative. Yeah, I mean, next year our intent is to build the cash reserve and get to that point where the university can make the repayment, ideally starting in fiscal year 28. But like you said, it may take a few years. I think one of the value, though, of having these dollars provided to the university now is it lets them head into fiscal year 27 with a clear slate and allows them to go with a significantly reduced budget next year that doesn't have to account for past decisions and past due payables.
But I do hear it'll be a few years for that payback. Follow up, please. What if we just say no? I mean, are the taxpayers on the hook for whatever level of fiscal recklessness or incompetence that happened at the university? Are we just on the hook being dragged behind the train, or what if we just said no?
Through the president, to the representative. So it would significantly challenge the recovery here. We would be continuing to navigate in a cash deficit in the fiscal year in a projected cash deficit would continue to strain supplier relationships and the university's overall ability to respond and run the university, which would be a real shame for the students. And I think they've got a new leadership team in place, obviously plenty of support from the state, including from DAS and ODHE. So it feels like the pieces are in place if we can get them a clean slate to really kind of take the next steps forward, continue rebuilding and revitalizing the university and get it back to a place where, you know, we don't have to have these conversations. It would be a very difficult path forward if support isn't approved here today.
I appreciate that. Mr. President, just one, I don't know if this is a question or not, but I appreciate Senator Wilkin bringing up the question of who gets held accountable for this Because it seems to me and I think a lot of our members that and I glad we are good at this but when the township fiscal clerk takes $1,200 worth of vacation pay that they didn't actually earn, we're really good at finding that and having a finding for recovery and saying you're going to pay back the taxpayers that. And then it just seems like in situations like this or Eastern Gateway or others, in the higher ed space, you run a university in the ground and the taxpayer is on the hook, it's just like, well, gee golly, tough luck. I really hope that we're digging in and saying, how do we get to this point? And I think folks who have us here spending $7 million of emergency money to cover a bunch of amorphous debts, I think they need to be held accountable.
Senator? Thank you, Mr. President. And I talked to Director Murnix and I've talked to FCC folks, and this is a peculiar situation, but the blame can't be put on just that institution. I think that oversight from the state's level is also responsible for some of where we are. And it's not a matter of not wanting to be held accountable. it's a matter of making sure that there were funds there in the first place to operate the organization. And so looking at these dollars and then where we move from here, there ought to be a way to looking at all of the IUC institutions that get those dollars coming through, that we're making sure that they are being held accountable on an ongoing basis. When you don't have an audit from 23 yet, you have to be thinking to yourself, well, who the hell is supposed to be doing the audit? and why aren't we on top of some of those things that needed to be done in the first place. So I think that at this point you cannot even insinuate that where do they go from here, which is, oh well, nowhere, that that's not a good question and not a good response. And so it's our responsibility to make sure that those dollars are there, contracts are not ignored, and from my understanding we'll be clawing back from some of those and the contractors that didn't finish some of those that those dollars owed to them will be diminished by here's what you owe us even though we owe you. So are we working on that from both sides?
Through the President and to the Senator, yes, that's correct.
Representative DeVilla first and then I'll get to you. Representative DeVilla.
Thanks, Mr. President. A lot has already been said. I was at an event a few weeks ago that was honoring former Senator and Governor Voinovich, and it was mentioned there in terms of a rather long anecdote that he stepped in back in the 1990s during his time as governor to work with others in the General Assembly and beyond to save Central State at that point in time. And the importance of that was underlined as a land-grant university, as a historically black university, as an important element of the higher education landscape in the state of Ohio. Here we are again, and there were times between the 1990s and today that we've also found Central State in a similar situation. A lot of the details have been asked about here already. I want to pull this up to the macro level and just ask about the sustainability of this institution as part of our family of higher education in the state, is this an institution that is going to survive once it gets past this latest tranche of financial challenges that it confronting today Through the president to the representative we believe it can.
And so the intent and our approach to date so far, working with, of course, the university leadership with DAS and with higher ed and others, other partners, is not just to get them through the fiscal year or into the next fiscal year. It's to build a model that can be sustained for 5, 10, 50, 100 years. And so the intent is really to be thoughtful and mindful about some of the things, in particular on the academic realignment, some of the things that we're doing with facilities to bring us closer to that, and then all of the financial work that's kind of gone in and will continue to go forward to get us a clean slate and then a start for fiscal year 27 under a reduced budget. and kind of reset the university is really the intent so that it can be sustainable moving forward.
Follow-up? Just a comment, Mr. President, and that's just that, again, this is an important part of our higher ed institutions here in the state, and we want to see it be successful, but with abiding challenges like this that continue to adhere to it, I think there's significant cause for concern going forward, and as we look at future budgets, future capital bills. This will certainly be on the radar for this board, for the finance committees in both chambers. So perhaps saying something that doesn't need to be said, but just
underscoring it from the standpoint of this office. Thanks, Mr. President. Representative Sweeney. Thank you, President. I just want to put a finer point or ask maybe directly on some of the previous questions. When you look at, I think it's pretty, should be concerning of all of us, what happened with Eastern Gateway, what we see happening with Central State, these things, as we all know, do not happen overnight. And so my question is, do you think that there is more oversight or any gaps in currently how we oversee all of our higher ed institutions? Because at the end of the day, who suffers the most are the students. And I don't think anyone's happy to be here to be giving out these dollars. We are doing so because it is an important institution, as Representative DeVilla just indicated, but how do we get to not be here? And if it is just bad actors, then why? I mean, I think to Representative Stewart's point, is there not enough accountability or holding people liable? Or is it the oversight or maybe a mixture of two? Like, could you speak to how do we make sure this doesn't happen again for any of our institutions? Because it's happened twice since I've been on the controlling board.
Sure, through the president, to the representative. I don't know that I'm the best one to answer that question just because I don't have a lot of higher ed experience. I've been with the state for a long time and with DAS for that period, but really with higher ed only for the last four months or so helping with central state. You know, I do think that we can perhaps set an example with the audit that's coming up and making sure that we hold people accountable. That's not my call, though, either. That'll be others making that decision in the release of that report. So I just don't know that I'm the best person to answer that, but it's a good question.
Follow-up?
Senator Chavez. Thank you, Mr. President, and I don't mean to pile on, but just a quick question on the board. How much of the board has been turned over since this has all been discovered?
Through the president to the senator I should have that answer I don have that answer I could get that answer to you though Okay It goes to the point of do we have folks that are aware and focused on this now Right. And what I can't tell you, you know, nearly all of the senior leadership at the university, separate from the board, has kind of changed, and there are new players in place. I think I would say to their credit they have not only been open to some of the recommendations that have come from the state, whether from DAS or higher ed but actively seeking those recommendations very open to making difficult decisions to ensure that they've got success for the long term. So again I think the leadership change has been a positive one for the university and I'll get you the answer on the board members.
Any further questions? Okay, hearing none, are there any objections to this request?
I'll object. Objection.
Okay. Item is approved with Representative Stewart and Representative Davila objecting.
Thank you. Thank you all.
Moving on to our second item. Columbus State Community College. State your name. Thank you, Mr. President.
Jeff Barr, Senior Director of Facilities Management with Columbus State Community College. Thank you. I'm not quite sure of the protocol precedent, so...
Senator will address you at this point. Okay. General, thank you, Mr. President.
Just general questions. I could have held probably twice as many items, but you were part of the lucky draw, so I hate waivers of competitive selection. And just wondering why Columbus State did not follow Ohio buys in this process. I wouldn't say it was a choice not to follow, as that we did have the cooperative purchasing agreements that Amoresco had bid on
and one through the Cooperative Council of Governments Incorporated and then the QALIS Group servicing that through them that we use that venue versus, if you will, competitively putting it out there on an RFP, sir. Follow up?
I don't know if I answered your question, but I'll try to do better. Yeah, so I'm trying to understand the process. So they won a previous competitive bid and you're just sticking with them now?
Through the Cooperative Council of Governments, through that, when they put those items out for bid, they did win that with competitive bidding from others that provide the same service. I had gone through that process in January 1 of 2023. previously Edison Community College, I believe, was here in November of 25, same kind of project, same kind of dollar amount, I believe, and used the same cooperative purchasing that had been referenced from the Equalist group.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Yeah. So since you use this cooperative pooling selective process,
they're not going to use Ohio buys as part of their consideration? Meaning Amoresco or the college.
I'm sorry. I thought you indicated that you used a cooperative pooling that did your competitive bidding for you. That is correct. I'm sorry.
They do not use Ohio buys as part of their consideration?
The criteria? I'm not sure if I can answer that question right now, sir. I apologize. I can't find out and better answer your question.
Thank you. And this is going to be a general theme for any time I'm on a controlling board. I want to make sure that we are buying from Ohio first and we're being competitive about it. So, yeah, no worries.
Yes, sir. I understand. Will do.
Are there any other questions? Seeing none. Are there any objections to this request? Seeing none, the item is approved. We are moving on. Again, Columbus State Community College.
Thank you. Appreciate your question.
One more. One more. You have one more. So the same theme on this item, number nine, is, you know, why didn't we use waiver? Why did we waive competitive bidding on it? And then the match, the number asking for the release does not match the purchase amount. I'm going to have one of my colleagues from Planning and Design and Construction that is the project manager for that come forward and answer your question, sir. You have number nine? Your project.
Hi, I'm Jackie Jakoboski. I'm project manager with Design and Construction at Columbus State. Thank you.
Senator?
Why the waiver of competitive bid and then why don't the numbers match between the requested amount and the purchase price?
I'm afraid that might be a typo. So we were under the understanding that using an IUC contract as a group purchasing organization agreement was an acceptable source, a way to source product. And it may be. I'm learning. Oh, okay. Okay. Yeah, so the Inter-University Council, they put out bids for certain types of products, and so it was competitively bid through them. And so these companies, the contract ID numbers that are listed there, they won those contracts, and we purposely picked furniture that would be on an IUC contract. because otherwise to do furniture like this, we would have to hire an interior designer to design it, and then we'd have to put it out to bid. This way, going through the IUC contract, we save money.
Senator?
Okay. Are there any more questions regarding item 9? Seeing none, are there any objections to item 9? Seeing none, the item is approved.
Thank you. Thank you.
Next is item 14, Miami University.
Hello, I'm Robert Bell, Director of Planning, Architecture, and Engineering for Miami. Thank you. Senator?
Thank you, Mr. President. I'm going to get my money's worth out of being a substitute up here.
So my question for this is why do you have to hire an outside source to do a building survey? Don't you have students or programs or a project that can do this within the university? Through the president to the senator, no, these are professional services that require a certified engineer or architect
that will be doing a facility condition assessment looking at complex building systems, the fenestration, the facade, the roof. So we're looking for someone who has functional knowledge of all those systems within their team to provide us information that we would then identify projects to move forward with and hire professional services for working drawings for those projects Follow No Okay are there any further questions regarding item 14
Are there any objections to item 14? Seeing none, the item is approved.
Thank you. Thank you.
Next is item 19, Washington State Community College. Mr. President and members of the board, my name is Dan Knoss.
I'm the Associate VP of Finance and Operations at Washington State College of Ohio. Thank you. I'm here to answer your question.
Thank you, Mr. President.
So the theme of the day is why a waiver of competitive bid, and where is Don Parker Sales located? That is a great question, and they are located in Pittsburgh.
We did do a competitive bid process for this equipment. had went through that process and they determined that they had the best price and best value that we could get.
Follow-up? Follow-up. On your request, it says a waiver of competitive selection.
That is correct. Through the Senator, through the President. Yes, we did ask for a waiver. We had been through the procurement process and, to be quite honest, too late in the process where we thought it was recommended to us to do a waiver and change that request.
Thank you, Mr. President. Yeah, so the point still stands. You know, I want folks to be looking at Ohio first and it needs to be competitive. Thank you.
Okay, are there any further questions regarding item 19? Seeing none, are there any objections to item 19? Seeing none, the item is approved.
Thank you.
Next is item 22, Office of Budget and Management. Good afternoon.
Todd Clark with the Office of Budget and Management to answer your questions today. Representative Stewart?
22? I think we covered it in the last conversation.
Okay, thank you.
Representative Villa. We're all set, Mr. President.
Thank you. All right. Are there any objections to item 22?
I'll object for the same reason.
I'm sorry?
I'll object for the same reason.
And Senator Ingram, did you object?
Okay.
Okay. Thank you. The item is approved with Representative Stewart and Representative Davila objecting.
Thank you.
All right. The next item is 34. Christine Van Kirk, Legislative Liaison for the Department of Commerce.
Thank you. Representative Stewart? I'm sorry. Sweeney?
Thank you, Mr. President. So this, my first question is, as you are seeking an increase in appropriation authority in order to contract with third party auditors to collect possible unclaimed funds My question my first question is what has been the total amount of money that we gotten from these contracts in the past and has it increased over the past few years of how much we've actually garnered in unclaimed funds?
Through the President to the Representative, the amount we collect each year varies based on how much these contract auditors find. For fiscal year 25, it was about $15.5 million. Fiscal year 24, it was $27.4 million. Fiscal year 23, it was $36.6 million. And this year, with this updated request, we are expecting $39.2 million.
Follow-up for representative? Yes, please. Thank you. That's incredibly helpful. So it does seem like we are progressively collecting more and more in unclaimed funds, almost exponentially, at least from the past five years. In a recent article with Cleveland.com, I'm just going to quote directly, Ohio has become more aggressive than any other state in seizing privately owned unclaimed funds, even as many other states are automatically returning money to their owners as their analysis had found. My question is, is there any way that the department is capable or able to actually, when we know that these individuals are Ohioans, if they're paying taxes within the capacity of state government, would it be possible when we know who these people are to return those Ohioans' dollars to them rather than now after 10 years a state takes them. So is that a possibility that somehow other states have done it? Is that something that the Department of Commerce thinks that we would have the capability to do?
Through the President to the Representative, let me first clarify that this request, the money that we are collecting is from businesses that should be remitting to the state. and then the second part we are always looking for ways to improve our processes and return as much money as possible to Ohioans I'd be happy to bring back your suggestions to to my team
yeah that'd be great just specifically is that possible and what would it take to do it would be great. Do you guys have any data in terms of when, or could you maybe explain to us what the current process is for your department to reach out to people? I know within the budget that there was a million dollar allocation, I think, to help these efforts. I'm curious what that actually gets us. And I know that with the media attention regarding the unclaimed funds, I'm sure more Ohioans than ever were made aware got their dollars. To me, that makes it very clear that there's a knowledge gap of people even understanding what unclaimed funds is that the state is holding on to their money. And so could you tell us about what currently happens from the department? what did the million dollars, like what does that add? And do you think that there's still a gap in knowledge in terms of Ohioans knowing that they may have money in unclaimed funds?
Through the president to the representative, the vision engages in a number of ways to return money to Ohioans. In February 2025, we completed major upgrades to our T system, which makes it easier to report and claim funds. We also do a lot of advertising on the internet social media and newspapers We increased intermittent staff and we also engage in in advertising such as the state fair For the money that was appropriated in the budget, we issued an RFP to secure a vendor to assist us in developing a public awareness and outreach campaign. The details of these efforts are still being worked through, but I'm happy to follow up with you once the details are finalized. And as far as the claims, we've had a large increase in claims. I think we've had over double the amount of claims this fiscal year as last fiscal year, but we've tripled the amount of claims that we've paid out.
Representative?
Just a follow-up. Thank you. That's helpful information. Do you think, with everything that you described, and I know that you're still working on the million-dollar RFP, Do you think that there's still a gap that exists in terms of, or when we use that $1 million, do you think a gap will still exist in terms of Ohioans' understanding that the state is holding on to money and that if they don't collect it in 10 years, it will no longer be their money? Do you think a gap will still exist? Like, it was a million dollars enough. What more can we do to make Ohioans aware of it is the crux of my questioning.
Through the President to the Representative, I think that we, from the amount of claims we've received and paid out, I think any gap is narrowing. As for, you know, how much more outreach we need to do, I would need to take that back to my team and ask their opinions on that.
Okay. Are there any other questions on this item? Senator Ingram.
Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you for that, and I appreciate Representative Sweeney bringing the question up regarding the fees. Now, maybe Senator Wilkin was talking and I missed it. How are those fees determined?
Through the President to the Senator, these fees are determined by our contracts. It's 10.25% of what they find. So if they don't find anything, then they aren't paid anything.
Follow-up, Senator?
Thank you, Mr. President. Okay, that makes sense. And I just want to be clear about when the money rolls off because we started with whatever was there for 10 years. Next year, somebody's money is there for 10 years. Are we making sure we're targeting those people whose money will be gone first?
Through the President to the Senator, This is, so this request is to go out and identify businesses that should have remitted their funds to the state. So it is for, it is not, this is not for identifying or giving back money to claimants. This is for requesting or finding funds from businesses that should remit it to the state so that we can reunite it with Ohioans.
Mr. President, I realize that my concern, though, is that we're paying over $2 million a year as of what you're looking for. Hopefully it'll be an up to. But I do want them to find as much money as possible. But at the same time, when you stop and think about we just gave $600 million of this unclaimed fund to the Haslam's in Cleveland to move the Browns to somewhere, that I want to make sure that we're doing everything we can to not just spend it on vendors finding the money, but then once we find it, we get it to somebody. That's the whole point.
Through the Present to the center. I understand. I mean, I want to highlight that this is not like an unusual request. This is the fourth time in seven years that we've come to controlling board of this type of ask. This request does not have anything to do with recent events, but I know we are always working on improving our processes and finding new ways to make sure Ohioans are aware of this money and that it can be returned to the rightful owners.
Are there any further questions regarding item 34? Are there any objections to item 34? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you. Next item is number 37, Department of Administrative Services. Hello, Allie Buccello, Associate Legal Counsel and Chief Legislative Officer at DAS. Thank you.
Senator Ingram?
You did. Oh, wow. How could I forget that? Thank you for reminding me. This is the five plus million dollars we're going to spend for the Governor's Mansion. I just have a question in regard to what type
of maintenance is this. I know that there's some, the HVAC and some other major pieces that are there, but just like any other homeowner, we've been doing that on an ongoing basis. When major purchases are made for a heating HVAC system, that we have a timing on that. We tell folks all the time that in your budget, if you've purchased a furnace that's supposed to last 12 years, 12 years from now, you should already have that money there. I understand this is on an ongoing basis. Is this more of an emergency, or is this $5 million for what?
Through the president, this request does include a request for updating HVAC and air venting. Those building mechanical units are at their end of life. This is not an emergency request. They're at end of life, so we're going to update them. Follow-up center?
Thank you, Mr. President. So they are end-of-life replacement for that specific. Okay, because we've seen it for landscaping and things of that nature. I just thought $5 million was a lot, but we're going to do that as well as some other projects that go along with replacing that HVAC.
Through the President, this request also includes additional projects, roofing repairs, lightning protection, lighting controls, a new standby generator, elevator control modernization, replacing heating, water piping, security upgrades, and some structural repairs. Thank you. Are there any further questions regarding item 37? Seeing none, are there any objections to item 37? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you. The next item is number 38. Riley Eberhardt, Legislative Affairs Manager, Ohio Department of Development. Thank you.
Representative Sweeney. Thank you, President. Thank you for being here with us today. I supportive of this request but the increase of the appropriation authority of million did raise you know my eyebrows at least And specifically which makes sense to me it's specifically within the form says that due to the increased cost of energy, which has increased the cost of spending, that's why we're needing this $40 million to help low-income households be able to afford to have electricity in their homes. To what extent is the current, do we know how many people are eligible that are on the program? And is there a gap that exists between that? So is this happening because more people are becoming eligible? Is that why there's the additional money?
Through the president to the representative, I don't have any specific numbers in front of me. I can definitely follow up with kind of how many individuals are enrolled in the program afterwards, if you would like.
Yes, that'd be great. And so it's not just individuals who are enrolled, but if you guys have a way to know who all would be eligible and how many who are eligible are actually enrolled. And then have you guys done any projections in terms to where this program is going? I know from our own PUCO, within the next decade, we could see our energy prices rise between 70% to 90% to where they are currently already on an exponential path. And so as you guys look at this program, are you looking at the sustainability of this program as the energy prices continue to increase? This is one of the very few, if only, options for people who are facing shutoffs or being able to afford that. So just are you looking at the projection of where this program is going, given that we know where the prices are going, which I hope we eventually get handled on the legislature. But at this time, we know that they're going to continue to rise. So just how you guys factor that in and the sustainability of this program.
Yeah, through the president to the representative. Typically, when we think about, you know, what the expected growth in the program is going to be, our program team does meet with energy providers to kind of get a better understanding of what that is going to look like for the year to come. So that is an ongoing conversation that we do take into consideration. And, of course, this program is flexible in nature to where they can go for a PUCO rate increase in the right case to be able to get additional dollars into the fund if it is needed, depending on demand. Follow-up?
Just a clarification. Just if you would have any specifics on what those conversations have been that you take into account, but what are they looking into the future would be helpful information.
Yeah, through the President and to the Representative. I can follow up with more specifics from our team.
Senator Ingram. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just actually have a question about the distribution. How are those handled back through, despite the fact that they're from the state, they actually come from the utility bills, and sometimes people do put extra money in, and the utility is also responsible for getting those dollars here to distribute for those folks, for those particular programs. How are those programs, how are those dollars distributed now? Through the president to the senator, if you don't mind,
I'm going to call on a colleague of mine to go into the details of the distribution. Good morning, Mr. President. Patrick Smith, the Chief of the Community Services Division at the Ohio Department of Development. Great. Senator? Yeah no Senator I appreciate the question We work closely with energy assistance providers all throughout the state largely community action agencies who work on processing those applications from Ohioans looking to participate in the program Then part of the rate process is the rates come in through the utilities and then are distributed back out to the utilities to apply towards people's bills once that application is reviewed and approved.
Follow-up, Senator? Thank you, Mr. President. And I just wanted to make sure that inclusion boots on the ground, which would answer some of the eligibility questions that were asked earlier and who are receiving those dollars. So I think that's the important piece of where we are with that.
Thank you. Thanks, Senator. Are there any further questions regarding item 38? Are there any objections to item 38? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you. Next is item 50, Department of Natural Resources. Ryan Frazee, Chief Financial Officer. Thank you, Senator.
Thank you, Mr. President. So this pavilion was destroyed two years ago. Do we need to rebuild it? Mr. President, Senator Chavez, yes.
So two years ago, that storm caused a lot of damage at both Alum Creek and Indian Lake State Park. It has been a priority, I think, for folks in that area. I believe legislative members have contacted us about wanting to rebuild that, so that's why we're here today. The damage for that storm didn't mean our deductible for the insurance of half a million dollars per occurrence, so that's why we're using capital today. Follow-up, Senator?
That was my follow-up. Thank you.
Are there any other questions regarding this item? Seeing none, are there any objections to this item? Seeing none, item 50 is approved. Thank you. Next is item 53. Ryan Frazee. Senator.
Thank you, Mr. President. So equipment does not have an expiration date, and I would argue or I'll submit to you that older equipment is probably more robust than newer equipment. So the justification was this truck is 20 years old and beyond its useful life. Can you explain that a little bit better to me?
Mr. President, Senator Chavez, so the Department of Natural Resources, is we try to use all our equipment until the wheels fall off. This is one where I would say that the smoke started showing up when we were putting fish in the streams. This vehicle has over 238,000 miles on it, so our staff felt a number of brake issues, all kinds of issues with the vehicle. So, again, we're using a company in Lima, Ohio, ODOT Cooperative Contract for this purchase, so we feel it's needed to be replaced. There was one prior, so we're trying to replace them.
spread out the replacement so yes follow up mr. president you know is this a diesel or gas truck so I was maybe chief of wildlife kinder we don't we can we can follow up with the board on okay so then I'll redirect my follow-up so diesel trucks are generally two hundred thirty thousand there they're in their sweet spot. They're not worn out by that point. Does the replacement of whatever the brakes or whatever, I mean that's got to be cheaper than $100,000 to buy a new truck, right? Mr. President, Senator Chavez, I think Chief of the Division of Wildlife,
Kendra Wecker, has some other details. Maybe she can share on this one. Thank you. Through the President, Senator Chavez, Kendra Wecker, Chief of the Division of Wildlife. So we have five of these trucks and two of them we put over into brake repair So we put them together We bandage them together as long as we can But it getting to the point where it a safety concern We go into the public areas we roll on 270 we roll on 71 and we don want to have a major brake failure that would injure our staff or the public So it's time for this truck to be replaced as well. Paul?
Yes, thank you, Mr. President. I can appreciate that. No one wants that to happen. I'm just advocating that with proper maintenance, the older equipment's probably going to be better than anything new that you can get now.
To the President, to Senator Chavez, I agree with you that our staff, they do routine maintenance. These guys fix things all the time. They're very particular about the equipment, trying to maintain good standards. So I do trust that their opinion, they said it's time to replace it for fear of these failures with the brake systems. that we've already had with two other trucks. So we asked, you know, respectfully to replace this truck as well.
One more comment. Thank you, Mr. President. I can appreciate that. I guess my point is I want the state to spend the money like it's its own money, like I would spend this on my personal decisions on buying equipment. So I want the state to have that same mindset. Spin it like it's your own.
Yes, sir.
I appreciate that.
Are there any further questions on item 53? Seeing none, are there any objections to item 53? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you. Next is item 59. Good afternoon. Aaron Roush, the Department of Education Workforce. Thank you.
Senator Ingram? Just tell me what it is. I see it's 50 coaches, but is it because, and especially after the statement of we've already got enough money and we don't need any, did we underestimate what we're going to use or just overbudget what we needed, or how do we get to needing 50 more and we budgeted for at least that?
President DeSantis, Senator Ingram, in the governor's state of the state, he challenged the department to do four things, one of which included adding an additional 50 literacy coaches next year. That was not originally part of our plan or budget or appropriations. And so the request in front of you today increases appropriation so we can then subsequently amend our contract that we have with four educational service centers that are providing these services to schools across the state to provide these additional literacy coaches to the schools and districts in Ohio with the lowest rates of literacy achievement. So the request is because we have seen the success of literacy coaches. The data bears that out. Schools and districts that have literacy coaches have seen significant increases in their literacy achievement and rates compared to those schools who have not over the last year. And so we are asking the controlling board to approve this request so that we can increase our reach across the state in serving schools and districts in this important area. Paula?
Thank you, Mr. President. I do realize I remember the governor's state as a state, and it was very important for us to do. But the whole point is that the dollars are already there. So my question becomes, how are the coaches... scheduled? Where are they scheduled? Is it because of new identities for new schools that need that service or exactly what? Because those dollars were intended to be spent for everyone to be in compliance with what was required with the science of reading. President DeSantis, Senator Ingram,
without your approval, we would not have the sufficient appropriation authority next year to hire an additional 50 literacy coaches. So that's what we are asking for.
No, I'll call the office.
Okay. Are there any other questions regarding this item? Are there any objections to this item? Seeing none, the item is approved. Thank you. Thank you. Next is item 61, Department of Children and Youth. Good afternoon. Teresa Vrasso, Legislative Officer with the Department of Children and Youth. Thank you.
Senator Ingram? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I actually just want to know with this particular program, the adoption program, and it's a wonderful program, help me with the process and what happens once the adoption is made and then where are we?
So just to give you through the president to the senator an idea, this program specifically is for children who are adopted out of the child welfare system who qualify. So if I want to become an adoptive parent in the state of Ohio, I have to choose an agency or a county to work with, go through a very vigorous home study process, essentially check a lot of back boxes with background checks, so on and so forth. Once a child is in my home, I could not adopt that child for six months. and then during that process, a caseworker or an entity from the agency would visit, make sure things are going well. After the fact, after the adoption is placed, depending on the agency that you choose, there's a ton of adoptive support for the families available and for the children to essentially ensure that they have all the support systems that they need in place to make sure that those kids are taken care of. One more, Senator?
Thank you. do the visits continue on an ongoing basis once that child is adopted? So through the president
to the senator, no, those are all before the adoption takes place. After the court determines that the adoption has been made that family has full parental rights of the child But again depending on the situation and the agency that family gets a ton of support and so does the child Some agencies provide for example respite services therapeutic services, other things to help the family. And then, of course, this funding also assists. Thank you, Mr. President.
So it would depend on the needs of the child as to the supports that the family receives. But who makes sure that that child is okay without some way for that child to call and report their foster parents? Or for us to know that that child is okay?
I got you. Through the president to the senator.
If you're talking about before the adoption or you're talking about after? I'm talking about after the president. I'm talking about after the adoption. This is where we get some of our issues. And I know it's like the whole see something, say something thing. But my concern is after the adoption, are we paying as close attention to those foster children as we did before they got adopted?
Through the president to the senator, I'm happy to follow up and give you some more details from DCY staff to kind of go through that process with you just to be sure. happy to follow up through the president or you as well, Senator. Thank you. Anything further? Are there any other questions regarding this item? Seeing none, are there any objections to this item? Hearing none, the item is approved. Thank you. Finally, item 62, Department of Medicaid. Good afternoon. Adam Landefeld, Liaison, Department of Medicaid. Senator?
Thank you, Mr. President. So my understanding is that your system only pools information on diabetes and hypertension now and you're asking to pool information on everything else?
Through the chair to the center, yes, that is correct. From my understanding, we only pull data from people that have those subsets of having hypertension and having diabetes. The reason we're doing this is the federal government is going more into a digital quality way. And this is the only place that holds this data. So we want to start getting this data, not only is it just for those, it shows, it would help us show test results, it would help us show release and make sure that they're getting their care coordination So if it was a child who was put in an institution but then was released making sure that they getting that follow care and it a good quality metric and it's a way to hopefully keep our members outside of a hospital or an institution. How well.
So this is not a requirement right now? It is not a federal requirement right now.
However, CMS, the administration, has shown that they want to go into this digital realm. And our folks, policy folks, do believe that that requirement will be coming down shortly in the pipeline. Follow-up?
Yes. So you kind of touched on it before. This will be used to do follow-ups. I'm stunned that you need a system to do that. So what are you going to do with this information?
So the information that we use is it goes into looking at our quality metrics, some of them as well. And if you want to get more specifically, I can have my data chief come up to go into more specifically what we're doing with it. President, my name is Stephen Matthew Stermer. I'm the Deputy Director and the Chief Data Officer for the Department of Medicaid. My office oversees the Data and Integrated Systems Group, and it's part of my team that is receiving the information for the HIE. So I'm happy to answer a question. So through the President to the Senator, could you please repeat your question?
Thank you, Mr. President. What are you going to be doing with this information? I mean, it's one thing to spend all this money and pull it in,
but how is the Department of Medicaid going to be better serving the people with this information? Appreciate the question. And through the President to the Senator, currently when we are doing quality metrics, we are reliant on the claims data that is returned to us, which primarily represents the services that have been rendered without any understanding of the outcome of those services. So by receiving the actual outcome of a service, rather than seeing that somebody received a service to treat their diabetes, we can actually see their A1C scores and see if the treatment is being effective in lowering that and helping them to get their diabetes under better control. So each one of these outcome measures that we are receiving from the HIE are more directly looking at the actual health outcome of our Ohioans that we serve to make sure that the programs that we put into place the quality metrics that we hold our plans and the fee program accountable to that it actually obtains the actual outcome that is preferable rather than just acknowledging that a service was rendered Senator, follow-up?
Follow-up. Thank you, Mr. President. So I'm surprised. So we're not doing this now? We're not following up these outcomes now?
So to the Senator through the President, we have information about the claims that have been rendered, but the claim itself does not contain information about outcomes. That information is contained in the clinical notes. The doctors and the hospitals, they have information within their systems, but even that information is somewhat limited. So the HAEs are a benefit to the hospitals and the professional medical groups so that anyone who participates in the exchange, if I go to an emergency room, I may not be treated by that person, but if I'm a part of that information exchange, then I can see other claims and other clinical outcomes that have been associated with that individual in order to help treat them. So at the point of treatment, a lot of the hospital networks and physician networks do have access to the information that they need. But from a payer standpoint, that information is not necessary for the payment of a claim, but is critical for the oversight of the quality outcomes of a program. So we have been pushing towards getting access to that information for the last, It's actually been several years that we've been trying to acquire the information and have been able to get to this point now.
Just one last. Thank you, Mr. President. There's so much more to talk about on this, so much more to dive into. But you're telling me, are you committing that this new information will give better quality of service to folks that are using the Department of Medicaid?
Yes, it will allow us to better monitor the quality programs that we're holding our providers and our plans accountable to. Anything further, Senator? Any other questions regarding this item? Seeing none, any objections to this item? Seeing none, the item is approved. All right, with no further business before the board, is there a motion to adjourn?
Representative Sweeney, second.
Representative Sweeney.
Senator Wilkin, we are adjourned.