Support for the statewide broadcast of the state of Ohio comes from Medical Mutual, providing more than 1.4 million Ohioans peace of mind with a selection of health insurance plans online at med mutual dot com slash Ohio by the law offices of Porter Wright, Morris and Arthur LLP now with eight locations across the country.

Porter Wright is a legal partner with a new perspective to the business community.

Maude Porter Wright dot com and from the Ohio Education Association representing 124,000 members who work to inspire their students to think creatively and experience the joy of learning online at OHEA.org.

Speaker Jason Stephens sits down for an extended interview on his priorities and the lingering battle over House leadership.

All this week in the state of Ohio.

Welcome to the state of Ohio.

I'm Karen Kasler.

This week, Republican House Speaker Jason Stevens unveiled his list of priority bills, including an income tax cut with property tax changes and affordable housing tax credit, which has not been specified.

A ban on trans athletes and girls sports and the backpack bill which would allow all k through 12 students in ohio to get taxpayer funded vouchers to attend whatever school they want, including private schools.

This comes as more than half of House Republicans say they support Representative Derek Marin as their caucus leader.

I sat down with Stevens to talk about all that and more this week.

So you released a list of 12 priorities out of the more than 50 bills that got assigned numbers and referred to committees this week.

So why these issues, these 12 over any of the others?

Right.

That's a very good question.

You know, there's, you know, dozens of issues that come before us here in the state legislature.

But I think being able to have a focus on what we can do to make Ohio a better place.

And, you know, the theme of our our bills are Ohio is our home.

And regardless of where we live in Ohio, you know, it's our home.

You know, we want our kids to be here.

Grandkids, you know, our our future to be here in Ohio.

So we tried to focus on three areas that are extremely important.

You know, I represent the area that Jim Rhoads is from, right?

And his number one thing was jobs, jobs, jobs.

And so our first area is growing the economy.

Our second area is protecting the family and third is educating our community.

So that's where the structure for the bills come in.

And we put, you know, four different bills to talk about different things in each, you know, the economy, the family and the schools and education.

So that's the basic structure of it.

So that people can see where we're going.

And the question becomes, how do we get there?

And, you know, that's the part that, you know, makes America great, right?

Is how do we get there?

So those are the points of of where we're going to focus our discussion.

I want to ask you about a couple of the specific bills here.

Starting House bill one, obviously a priority if it's House Bill one.

Correct.

This bill would create a two and three quarter percent flat tax and roll back the states, 10% roll back on local property taxes to pay for it.

This was a priority that you had said even to reporters a couple of weeks ago that property taxes was a big thing you're looking at.

The sponsor, Representative Adam MATTHEWS, has said it will cost $1.2 billion to schools and the Legislative Service Commission estimates it will cost local governments 300 I'm sorry, $658 million.

Some of those entities are things like cities, counties, children's services, libraries, parks, zoos, townships, senior centers.

Isn't this essentially taking money away from local governments to pay for a state tax cut?

So that's a very good question.

I'm a former county auditor, so one of the most complicated things I've ever seen is your property tax bill.

Try trying to explain how Ohio property tax work.

It's calculus is easier than understanding Ohio property taxes and part of the reason that is so complex in it's hard to explain makes it very difficult to change.

Right.

So back in the 1983, when the income tax was raised, what happened was, is the legislature and the governor signed in a rollback to people's property taxes of 10%, which is fine or whatever the issue was it was 40 years ago.

Right.

But what that did is that brought those two taxes together and they have been connected ever since.

So essentially in Ohio, we put we pay income taxes so that we can give ourselves a break on property taxes, which makes it hard to lower either one.

So what this bill proposes to do is to take that rollback off.

You know, so the graph stays full and you're able to use that money for an income tax, cut the property tax by lowering the taxable value from 35% to 31 and a half percent.

You know, it makes it, you know, good as a property tax reduction for, you know, the taxpayer on some property taxes.

So if you've got a bond levy or something like that that's supposed to raise X amount of dollars, it's not going to change the amount of tax to where it's going to change specifically is the inside millage, the ten mills of inside millage, which is, you know, usually a school village, the county.

And what happens with that inside millage is is because it's inside millage when property values go up, that inside millage has been going up without a vote of the people for those entities.

So the way this will work hopefully is that if the property values go up, the inflation factor is in there, then the taxable rate will go or the taxable rate will go down.

Therefore, keeping the dollar amount as an offset to inflation.

Now the problem is, is for local governments, those automatic increases that have come over the years with inflating values are going to have to come from either votes of the voter or, you know, other ways of of dealing with that.

So part of the bill also is talking about, you know, making those local entities whole this budget cycle the same way, similarly that the legislature did with the Medicaid sales tax a few years ago, very similar.

You know, you put it in, you know, with the taxable value or the yeah, the taxable value is what the rates are for each individual.

So that's that's the plan with that to, to keep local governments whole as far as not cutting but at least changing the system until we break the property tax away from the income tax is going to be very difficult to lower either one.

So this is that's the plan.

This is a lot of money.

And you even said it could be votes of the people.

So you're talking about local governments potentially having more levies before voters?

Not necessarily it I mean, it could, but it's you know, if if a local area wants more fire department service, they vote for a levy.

If they want more.

So, you know, it's it's again, that self determining factor.

I live in the lowest property tax county in the state.

We like it that way.

We don't vote for levies.

You know, some of my friends, you know, they love to vote for levies and they have great, you know, but it's a choice.

But wouldn't levies be needed just to keep this funding that you're talking about?

I mean, we're talking about $1.9 billion that could be lost.

No.

These levies or the ones that would be most affected are going to be the inside millage levies.

So that is where you could see some change.

But that is going to be determinant on every single taxing district and there's over 4000 taxing districts in the state.

So we'll township.

So once again, the tax cut appears to benefit wealthier taxpayers.

That's going to be a criticism that's already out there.

How do you respond to that?

Well, one of the things that we have and I I'll have to check to make sure that it's in the bill, it's a very substantive bill.

But one of the things we wanted to try to do in that bill is a couple of other things for the lower income taxpayers.

We had a bill that I'd introduced the last two years about the homestead exemption being tied to inflation, being indexed to inflation.

So as inflation goes up, the dollar amount that's off for the senior citizens of veterans will continue to grow.

The other thing that I would like to see us do is right now and this is getting a little wonky, but this is what we're dealing with.

The the owner occupancy credit in Ohio is two and a half percent.

So if you live in the house that you own, you get two and a half percent on on some of your bills.

What I would like to do is take that to a flat dollar amount because a two and a half percent discount on an $80,000 House tax wise is not nearly as much as a two and a half percent discount on $1,000,000 home.

Correct.

So if we were able to put it at $125 regardless of the home's value, so that first hundred and $25 is for the owner, occupancy is going to help those who are in a in a house they've lived in forever or, you know, a new homeowner.

So we want to encourage people to live in those homes and stay in those homes.

But on the other side of that tax cut is a kind of modifying how we incentivize people to own their own home.

So those are a couple of things that I think will be very beneficial for everybody across the spectrum.

But wealthier taxpayers would benefit more.

On the income side.

Yes, but that same person that owns that million dollar home, you know, is only going to get $125.

So it but in theory, it should it should work out.

And, you know, that's the great thing about these things.

We can have you know, I'm sure there'll be a lot of tax attorneys and folks looking at these numbers and there'll be spreadsheets all over the place and local governments.

But that's part of making these a priority.

Here's where we want to go.

Let's let's vet these bills.

Let's make sense of it, because our taxing system in Ohio is so complex and it's so difficult to really fundamentally change it until we all understand it better.

So I want to move on to education.

Governor Mike DeWine said his budget would fully fund this school, the Fair School funding plan, the cut Patterson formula for the next two years of the phase in as well as he would expand the Ed Choice voucher program to 400% of the federal poverty level.

Right.

You're going further than that.

You've got to one of the priority bills to fully fund the school funding plan.

But also you want to do the universal voucher program called the backpack bill.

That's one of your priorities here.

It goes further than the Ed Choice bill.

And I've seen estimates the last time the backpack bill was proposed, but it could cost $1.2 billion.

How can the state afford to do both of those things along with all the other things that are out there?

That's a great question.

And it kind of goes back to where we finished off with.

The last question is, you know, there was a lot of time and effort, you know, on the Fair School funding plan years, frankly, and, you know, by having hearings and hearings and meetings and this for for many, many years on how do we do this.

And, you know, it was agreed by the legislature and the governor in the last year that this is what we're going to do.

So we wanted to make sure that we are committed to that as we move forward.

However, there are ideas.

You know, you talk about the vouchers, the universal vouchers in the backpack bill.

Well, the backpack bill has not had a hearing since introduced.

And so my thinking on it is, is something that fundamental needs to have the hearings.

And so, you know, we're going to give that hearing, you know, to the backpack bill.

Again, as a former county auditor, my question is, is where's where's the money?

How does it affect local the local property taxpayer?

And I think there's a lot of questions that need to be, you know, that I'm sure.

And the folks who are advocating for the backpack bill deserve the ability to say, here's the answers and here's where the numbers are.

So actually, the backpack bill has been referred to primary and secondary.

So they've got a lot of time.

They get a lot of I was talking to Chairman Byrd yesterday, and they've got a lot of love and a lot of meetings there in the in the second primary and secondary education committee.

But those are the kind of things with these priorities are here's what we are wanting to talk about, wanting to debate, wanting to it gets back to how do we make Ohio the great state that it is.

Right.

So these are hard issues.

They are complicated and they're not easy fixes on the questions that we're dealing with.

So House Bill five would modernize the adoption process and has bipartisan comes not just absolutely the language I've seen makes it appear to be just a placeholder.

Bill So what can you tell me about the goal of this bill and specifically what it clarify that only a husband and wife can adopt a child in.

Ohio that I can't?

I don't know the answer to that.

I haven't seen the language.

Representative Ray, who's on our leadership team.

Yes, yes.

Sharon Ray is leading that charge.

And I think it's Representative Baker.

I'm trying to remember that.

But nevertheless, I know that it's it's an issue that, you know, I think all of us can agree that, you know, we want to increase adoption, make it easier for loving families to bring that together.

And we'll have to check we'll have to check the language on that.

I'm sure that'll be a discussion point in that bill, too.

So why bring back the ban on trans athletes and girls sports?

Was this in the backpack bill specifically designed to bring folks from the Marin Coalition on board?

Well, you know, this particular legislation has been passed in 18 states.

And it's you know, it's about protecting girls sports.

You know, Title nine was very important.

It changed the goal.

I'll tell you, of my former legislator was Clyde Evans, if you remember Clyde Evans from Arkansas in Ohio.

And Clyde was just the best and used to ride his motorcycle all around everywhere.

But so Clyde was a big basketball player.

And one of the things he passed away about a year ago went to his funeral.

One of the things I never realized was he had the three daughters in Clyde Evans was a pioneer in girls sports in high school, and he went that and insisted that they have a girls basketball team, you know, and his three daughters are out there and, you know, a set of twins and, you know, the guy or gal player schools became this and it you know, one of those daughters is is a judge judge Evans.

The other one was a NCAA basketball coach.

And those other things and just all very, very successful.

And the benefits of having, you know, you know, of course, family members and all this of of allowing young girls, women to have their place in sports, build confidence.

It builds, you know, amazing skills that we need to encourage.

And that bill is going to make sure that those opportunities are still there.

And it's it's an issue that, you know, I'm I'm passionate about our caucuses, and I think we're going to be able to to pass that bill and do it in a way that is not I'm not angry, but, you know, understanding that we are protecting what's important to us because we want young girls and women to be successful in all walks of life.

You know, it's not like they're going to be, you know, NBA basketball stars, but they might be WNBA basketball stars, but still, they're going to be the folks who lead our communities and get us, you know, it's fantastic.

So anyway, I'm excited about that.

Bill, as you can tell.

All 32 Democrats are not probably not excited about that bill.

They all voted for you for speaker.

And they have been infuriated with that bill being proposed before saying this.

Well, that.

Very few one athlete in the.

State maybe so.

But nevertheless, it's and that's one of the things that we wanted to do with this version of the bill is make sure that it's legally, you know, that the language is very, you know, tight.

And we are looking at other states that have been tested in the courts.

It's very clear, you know, the state of West Virginia has a similar thing that's that's been voted on.

So we'll get through it and we'll do it.

And if we we can pleasantly disagree, that would be the best.

But, you know, that's the legislature you have they have these every down.

They're right Democrats did vote for you.

You said in a blog they had cited some concerns with the mayor and coalition about education, tax cuts, the requirement for 60% voter approval, constitutional amendments.

That is not one of your priorities, but that was referred to in the batch of bills that was referred this week.

And yet you've got a tax cut as House Bill one.

You've got the backpack bill, House Bill 11.

The constitutional amendment proposal is House Joint Resolution one.

Mm.

Were the Democrats deceived when they voted for, you.

Know, I mean, if you look at, you know, these are priority bills when they're out of 12, you know, I think there's five or six that are co-sponsored or joint sponsored by both parties.

And this is the thing about the legislature.

We can agree on most things.

And and even Allison Russo said in her statement that there are things that you a lot of things we're.

Sure we will agree on those things.

And that was part of the reason I wanted to, you know, put that out there is to remind people, you know, we're Ohio is our home.

You know, I mean, we have you know, my next door neighbor is a Democrat.

That doesn't mean we fight all the time, you know, but but nevertheless, we do agree on some things on a lot of things.

We disagree on other things, but it's we don't have to necessarily be disagreeable.

We need to be respectful.

We need to try to understand what's going on.

And then ultimately we vote on it right.

And then there's the Senate and the governor.

So there's a lot of checks and balances to this process.

And I think that on a lot of these issues where we agree, it's important to let folks know it's okay to agree on things now, on things we disagree on, then we need to have that debate.

We need to understand where other people are coming from.

But also at the end of the day, we're all Ohioans and we do have to make the decisions.

And that's that's where we will go forward.

So I think it will be a good conversation to have with with all of our colleagues.

So I'm looking forward to it.

There are Democratic co-sponsors on half of your priority bills represent Americans that after your list came out that he essentially wants only Republican co-sponsors on priority bills.

He said there are great bills in the pipeline.

And, you know, the speaker's trying to make sure the Democrats can get put on them when they're Republican ideas.

That doesn't sound like unity.

And when you pair that with Allison Rousseau saying some of this is extremist legislation, John, how do you unify all of these people in the House and move forward?

And, you know, this is as as I've said before, the job of the speaker is to provide a platform, in my opinion.

You know, I have my personal, you know, and, you know, what district I represent as far as priorities go.

Right.

But at the end of the day or the beginning of the day or whatever, the the speaker's best role or works best, when we put the platform there and we have the arena of ideas, and if that member has a bill and they can convince, you know, 50 other members of the House that it's a great bill, you know, that we pass it, right.

Have to be 50 members of the House.

Or would you bring bills that could not get 50 Republican votes to the floor?

Probably.

You know, I mean, it's not a it's not in the rules.

I think if you've got 48, one or 30, you know, you don't want to have, you know, the specific math.

But again, if it's a good bill, then a majority of the House of Representatives supports, you know, that's that's something that we we go with.

I think this and, you know, I'm a party chairman.

I'm a Republican Party chairman.

I've been a Republican for a long time.

But we have you know, I have a history of working with both sides.

You know, even my local paper said that, you know, you can't doubt Stevenson's conservatism, but we have been able to work across the aisle and find where we agree.

You know, I spent six years in the minority as a county commissioner.

You know, when you're outnumbered 2 to 1, it's kind of tough.

So it's kind of the same thing.

But but through respect, through understanding and listening, I think that is how we bring the unity in saying, you know what, we're going to disagree on this, but let's talk about it.

And but we're going to agree on these other things.

That still means we can advance conservative ideas, frankly, because I like conservative ideas and I think they work better.

But I also want to bring along as many people as we can to convince those that we are right, not just say, you're wrong, we're right and we're going to do it our way.

So we're almost out of time here.

But I want to ask you about the status of the Ohio House Republican Alliance campaign account.

You showed reporters a credit card from that account with your name on it.

Right.

But Representative Mariner Phil Plummer continue to say that they are the chairs of the caucus and O'Rourke and that they control the account.

And that could be a big deal because there have been calls from Marin supporters to punish the Republicans who voted for you with primaries next year.

Right.

And, you know, there's a lot of lot of talk and and rhetoric in these things.

And, you know, my goal is to unify the caucus.

But they say they're going to sue for this.

Are you concerned?

No.

You know, that's fine.

But what I want us to do is to protect our incumbents, the people who, you know, our representatives in our party.

We want to work together to bring to bring that support for all of us.

You know, I'm not, you know, vindictive or trying to get somebody who didn't vote for me on the floor.

They're Republicans and friends.

And I respect their vote.

But as the caucus, we want to be able to protect these ideals, you know, like we have the priorities to talk about.

That's extremely important because we are able to, as the caucus set what we discuss and prioritize.

Are you the chair of the Republican caucus?

Because Derek Behrens is here?

Of course.

Of course you are the chair speaker.

Yes, absolutely.

Representative Derek Marron said this week his group of more than 40 members will release its own broad agenda soon.

He also said while there are bills that he called himself excited about, there are also what he called missing gaps, such as the 60% voter approval for constitutional amendments proposal.

Marin is set to appear on next week's show.

We also hope to hear from Minority Leader Alison Rousseau.

This week, jurors in the trial of Republican former House Speaker Larry Householder and ex Ohio GOP chair Matt Burgess heard a voice from a past lobbyist, Neil Clark, who died by suicide in March 2021, effectively testified on tape in the racketeering trial.

As the prosecution continues its case.

I talked with Marty Slayton of the Ohio Capital-Journal.

He said that he was Larry Householders Proxy on the House Bill six effort and that, you know, they were moving it through the legislature.

They had difficulties in the Senate and then they fought the repeal initiative.

Now dark money donations are legal, but it seemed like there was an attempt to try to connect the pay to play scheme aspect of this through what Clark was saying.

Yes.

In fact, there was a meeting that was set up by undercover FBI agents that Larry Householder attended back in 2019.

And there's a conversation about how dark money that was allowed by the 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United decision really made things dirtier than what they were.

It was just all this dark money that the what makes it dark money is the donors don't have to be disclosed.

So corporations could funnel unlimited amounts of money into these accounts.

And then it went to politics.

And as Clark said, in one of these conversations, the politicians themselves had total deniability.

They could say they just didn't know who committed contributed to that fund.

And householder was not the only politician that was referenced.

Clark talked about Governor Mike DeWine, for instance.

He did talk about Governor Mike DeWine.

In fact, he used the number $3 million in connection with first energy.

So these are huge amounts of money.

Where did the cross-examination go when they were dealing with this witness that was testifying on tape.

That basically they said that, you know, the trust is that this is Neil Clark.

He had an interest in exaggerating his influence and that you don't hear much of Larry Householder saying, yeah, you know, if you give me this money, I'm going to give you your bailout.

And that's the the circle that everybody's still waiting for the prosecution to close because householders, lawyers are saying, you know, dark money, it's all perfectly legal.

And, you know, we're not hearing this quid pro quo yet.

So but there's still, you know, a couple more weeks of testimony we have.

There's much more of my conversation with Marty Sladen, which you can watch on the Statehouse News Bureau, YouTube page or look for it on our Twitter feed.

And that is it for this week for my colleagues at the Statehouse News Bureau of Ohio Public Radio and Television.

Thanks for watching.

Please check out our Web site at state news dot org and follow us and the show on Facebook and Twitter.

And please join us again next time for the state of Ohio.

Support for the statewide broadcast of the state of Ohio comes from Medical Mutual, providing more than 1.4 million Ohioans.

Peace of mind with a selection of health insurance plans online at med mutual dot com slash Ohio by the law offices of Porter Wright, Morris and Arthur LLP now with eight locations across the country, Porter Wright is a legal partner with a new perspective to the business community.

More at Porter right dot com and from the Ohio Education Association representing 124,000 members who work to inspire their students to think creatively and experience the joy of learning online at OHEA.org.