March 24, 2026 · Finance Committee · 1,658 words · 13 speakers · 74 segments
Eddie will come back to order and we will resume the first hearing on substitute House Bill 730. The chair recognizes Vice Chair Chavez for a motion.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to adopt Amendment 2077-4.
Thank you. The amendment is in order.
As many of you know, Congress and the President recently enacted the Rural Health Transformation Program. The state was awarded $202 million for the state for fiscal year 26 and state fiscal year 27, $404 million for the first two years of this five-year program. The Department of Health has been working with Health and Human Services on the state plan for this expenditure. This amendment is the General Assembly's appropriation authority for those dollars. Again, 100% of the dollars are federal. Since the program starts in fiscal 26, which will end on June 30th, it is imperative to move as quickly as possible to start these dollars flowing into Ohio, which is why we've decided to take this bill up in the reappropriation bill. I would like to point out that one key part of the amendment, which I know many members of the Senate have an interest in, providing dollars to help improve maternal health care and provide for accessible maternity units, especially in our rural areas. The plan puts Ohio on the path to providing at least $30 million in each of the fiscal years for these outcomes once applicants go through the competitive process. Some additional allocations, which can be seen and listed in the first two pages of the amendment, include $42 million over two years for school-based health centers, $33 million over two years for healthier Ohio initiatives to prevent chronic disease, and $50 million over two years for an expansion for the Ohio Sea Initiative. I feel this amendment is a very important addition to the bill, and despite our desire for an unamended bill, I would ask for your support for this amendment.
Are there any objections to the amendment? Okay. So there's an objection. The question is, shall the amendment be adopted? Will the clerk please call the roll? Chair Serino? Yes. Vice Chair Chavez?
Yes.
Ranking Member Hicks-Hudson?
Yes.
Senator Blessing?
Yes.
Senator Brenner?
Yes.
Senator Craig?
Yes.
Senator Ingram?
Yes.
Senator Lang?
Yes.
Senator Manchester?
Yes.
Senator Manning?
Yes.
Senator Patton?
Yes.
Senator Romanchuk No Senator Wilkin Yes Having sufficient votes the amendment becomes a part of the bill Chair recognizes Vice Chair Chavez for a motion on the bill
Before that, a point of order. I have a couple questions about the amendment, if you can answer them before we vote on it.
All right, please go ahead.
Thank you. I was wondering, since you brought up the issue about the rural maternity units and things like that, Is there, is the, do we know how these funds will be spent and are they going to be in keeping with what the Department of Health has created in terms of their response, the health responsive projects, their RFP that's already been awarded? And are these funds, if you can answer, if those funds are going to be available to support that particular program?
So I will do my best to answer your questions. Okay. So the individual providers will have to make application for these grants. And it will be to either reconstitute, if a system has closed their maternity care, or needs to expand it without including bricks and mortar. Of course, that's not permitted under the federal guidelines. That they will have to make application to the Department of Health, and Department of Health will make those decisions as to whether they qualify and how much of the money will they be appropriated.
So if I may follow up, sir.
Please.
And that is I understand that there is a process by which you can apply. I'm wondering about is the purpose for these funds to support the Department of Health's rural maternal health projects that have already been awarded, not the ones that are, according to what you're saying, that will be our applications for, if you know.
Yeah, this will be for future activities. Okay. And again, the problem that this is attempting to remedy is that in many of the rural areas, as I think we all understand, that many of the rural hospitals have closed their maternity departments departments, and therefore patients have to travel a long way for something that sometimes comes without notice, much notice. And so this is an attempt at remedying that.
And I, if I may, I appreciate those comments because we all are quite aware of, you know, what is happening in rural Ohio as it relates to maternal health care. And I just want to be sure that, you know, that what was contemplated originally is going to be followed through with these dollars and that the purpose that, you know, because so oftentimes when we do things at piecemeal and no disrespect to anyone but you know I want to make sure that we using these dollars as effectively and efficiently as possible Yeah I would say too that the Senate voted or worked very hard to get these rather substantial
amounts, $60 million over two years, for this project. And the details of how it will be rolled out and how the grants will be made will be determined by the Department of Health.
Okay. And as far as you know, we believe that the Department of Health is going to follow through with what they initially said as part of their original budget and their original guidelines or purposes for taking care of this issue of maternal health in the world.
As far as we know, yes.
I have a second one.
Do you have another question?
Yes, Senator Ingram.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And I guess maybe my concern is that most of, because this comes from the big bill, I assume, is targeted at rural. And my question becomes, is it on top of what we've already set aside for Appalachian dollars that are already presented very deliberately for those areas for specific groups of people, and I guess maybe the determination as to where the dollars were going specifically, was it in the big bill or did we decide that? The dollars were in the big bill, but were they specific to maternal health, etc., etc.?
Okay, so the state decided that. The Senate specifically proposed that in our negotiations with the House. Okay.
So, yes, it came from the legislature.
The dollars came from the federal.
Right. I understand that part. I just wanted to know where the specifics as to where the dollars were intended to be spent. And obviously that was done through somebody.
Did you have another question?
Yeah, if I may.
Thank you, Senator Ingram, for focusing on that. The second question I have is how, so the various categories that are being implemented through the funding, has there been discussion with the Department of Health to determine which projects are emphasized, which projects are legislatively intended, et cetera?
We have had many discussions, and the House and the Senate together have had discussions with the Department of Health in other parts of the administration. And I think our view is that clearly the objective is to show a preference in the dissemination of all of this funding to rural hospitals That the intent in the first place That why it titled the way it is That just the one category but the overall expenditures
Are all going to be focused on rural health care. Yes. Senator Romanchuk.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm focused on lines 24 through 29, and it would appear that the flimsy criteria that was previously in the amendment has now been removed. and it looks like the Department of Health shall develop a list of hospitals. What criteria will they be using to develop that list?
So that was the reason for the delay in our committee hearing today. And we had difficulty or we saw some difficulty in some of the parameters outlined in the dash 1 and dash 2 versions of the amendment that would have not been as clear as they could be. In fact, we thought that some of them were actually confusing in trying to make sure that the right number of hospitals were serviced. We do know that the House, in the bill that they passed, had outlined 13 hospitals that we talked about earlier. and so we decided that instead of trying to chase the right verbiage and the right criteria, there were so many puts and takes, we decided on the language that we have now included in this and it will come to the controlling board for appropriations to be released. Thank you.
Senator Patton, did you have something?
No.
Any other questions? Okay, so I will once again recognize Vice Chair Chavez for a motion on the bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to favorably report substitute House Bill 730 to the Committee on Rules and Reference.
The question is, shall the bill be favorably reported to the Committee on Rules and Reference? The clerk will please call the roll. Chair Serino? Yes. Vice Chair Chavez?
Yes.
Ranking Member Hicks-Hudson?
Yes.
Senator Blessing?
Yes.
Senator Brenner?
Yes.
Senator Craig?
Yes.
Senator Ingram? Senator Lange?
Yes.
Senator Manchester? Senator Manning?
Yes.
Senator Patton?
Yes.
Senator Romanchuk? Senator Wilkin? Having sufficient votes, the bill is favorably reported to the Committee on Rules and Reference. I would like to move without objection to give LSC the permission to harmonize amendments as needed for Substitute House Bill 730. Seeing no objections, LSE has the authority to harmonize the amendments. This will conclude the first hearing on Substitute House Bill 730. Is there any other business before the committee? Seeing none, the committee is adjourned.