43
Critics voice opposition to budget bill amendment on park districts
COLUMBUS
As the Ohio House of Representatives moves closer to a vote on a budget bill, critics of a proposed amendment that would expand the power of probate courts over park districts are speaking out.
The amendment to House Bill 49 stipulates that a probate court may “investigate matters involving the park district,” “impose duties or restrictions on a person or party who interferes with the park district’s purposes,” and may “tax the cost of proceedings as court costs to be assessed by the court in its discretion,” among other measures.
Opponents say the amendment is an attempt to silence citizens, such as those who rallied against actions taken by Mill Creek MetroParks leaders in the past.
Among the amendment’s critics is Tom Shipka, a member of the MetroParks board. Shipka submitted testimony to the House that details the public backlash against MetroParks leaders – first for the killing of Canada geese, then for staff dismissals last year – that preceded his time on the board. He noted, too, the changes sparked by public outcry, such as Mahoning County Probate Judge Robert N. Rusu Jr.’s creation of a citizens screening committee for board candidates, the board’s establishment of citizen advisory committees, and more.
“These initiatives have led to a significant decrease in public criticisms of park leadership and an evolving change in the relationship between park leadership and the community,” Shipka wrote. “The progress in Mahoning County shows that dissent should be welcomed, taken seriously, and used as a pivot to re-examine the policies and practices of park leadership.”
Some of the same Mahoning Valley residents who criticized MetroParks leaders during those episodes also are speaking out against the proposed amendment.
Bill Adams, who was involved with the Concerned Citizens of Mill Creek Park group after the February 2016 staff dismissals, wrote to House Finance Committee Chairman Ryan Smith to protest what he sees as the “overly broad, vague and probably unconstitutional” nature of the amendment.
“In Mahoning County, we had 200 people show up to voice their displeasure with the park board and director due to a mass firing of staff just two months after we passed a 15-year tax levy to support the park,” Adams wrote. “Under this new language, if the county probate judge decides that such large public protests at board meetings ‘interferes with park district purposes’ ... will we citizens be subject to a court hearing, have a duty [fine] imposed and restricted in our access to future board meetings?”
Also among the amendment’s vocal critics is state Rep. John Boccieri of Poland, D-59th. Boccieri is among members of the House Democratic Caucus who on Friday submitted an amendment that would remove the original park district amendment from HB 49. The House Finance Committee on Monday will decide whether to accept that proposal and others.
“The fact that the majority included this amendment in the sub bill to me shows us that Columbus is intent on quelling dissent,” Boccieri said. “Allowing a probate judge to fine or impose penalties on community members who voice concerns about park board decisions weakens our democracy.”
The amendment originated with House Republicans. Smith, R-93rd, a sponsor of the budget bill, did not return a request to comment Friday.
Wilson R. Huhn, a constitutional law expert, questions the legality of the proposed amendment.
“This is an odd piece of legislation, and a very bad one,” said Huhn, distinguished professor emeritus at the University of Akron School of Law.
He said the proposal would amount to “an extraordinary amalgam of governmental powers,” giving a probate judge administrative, prosecutorial and judicial powers all at once, violating the U.S. Constitution’s separation-of-powers doctrine.
“Even if these had been granted to several different public officials in accord with the separation of powers, the proposed violation – ‘interference with the purpose of a park district’ - is so vague as to be meaningless,” Huhn said.
A House floor vote on the budget bill is slated for next week.