Speaker 1: Bill cunning and the Great America, and welcome this Monday afternoon.
Speaker 1: The Tri State Reds Baseball kicks off about six oh
Speaker 1: five tonight. But the Red Sox, believe it or not,
Speaker 1: the Red Sox have a losing record, and the Reds
Speaker 1: have won five of the past six series. Is look
Speaker 1: hotter than a firecracker, and we'll see what happens. They
Speaker 1: have three games in Boston, then they're often have three
Speaker 1: games in Philly, and they come home next week getting
Speaker 1: ready for the All Star break, and have seven games
Speaker 1: and home against weak opponents. But nonetheless, the Reds are
Speaker 1: with a rocket right now, one of the best teams
Speaker 1: in baseball, which I find hard to believe on June thirtieth,
Speaker 1: but that's the case. But until then, the Speaker of
Speaker 1: the House in columbuses, of course, Matt Huffman from Allen County, Alama,
Speaker 1: home with the q P Burger and so much more.
Speaker 1: And Speaker of Huffman, welcome again to the Bill Cunningham Show.
Speaker 1: And I asked you off the air. We do have
Speaker 1: white smoke over the Capitol, but there's also a possibility
Speaker 1: of the governor vetoing parts of this which you can override.
Speaker 1: With sixty and twenty house in the Senate. But one
Speaker 1: thing in Cincinnati which is bigger than Montana is the
Speaker 1: Bengals and the Browns now living in Lima. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure you care a lot about Bengals and Browns football.
Speaker 1: You probably care more about about the legacy of Leonard
Speaker 1: Rush and also Ohio State. But there's a lot of
Speaker 1: concern here that you're treating the Cleveland Browns differently by
Speaker 1: giving them the hundreds of millions of dollars from unplaying funds,
Speaker 1: while the Bengal deal, which is an loi, is not
Speaker 1: yet signed, but it's a promise to sign. So can
Speaker 1: you tell the American people this Monday afternoon what is
Speaker 1: the status of the Bengals deal and the Browns deal
Speaker 1: and why one deal was approved the other other one
Speaker 1: wasn't unclaimed funds, etc. That was used. Instead of an
Speaker 1: additional tax on gaming many ways to fund it, you
Speaker 1: came up with the unplaying funds. Explained the deal to
Speaker 1: the American people.
Speaker 2: Well, first, the Bengals do have an opportunity to take
Speaker 2: advantage of this fund, these unclaimed funds, as as do
Speaker 2: other sports and cultural facilit There's an entire track of
Speaker 2: things that people can do that that entities can do
Speaker 2: qualify and the Bengals can do that, as could the
Speaker 2: Columbus Symphony Orchestra, and maybe some day the Symphony, Reds
Speaker 2: or fill in your favorite entity, so there will be
Speaker 2: a way for the Bengals to qualify like this there
Speaker 2: The Browns organ or the Browns program, of course, was
Speaker 2: much different I think than probably any entity for a
Speaker 2: long time in that they they're putting in a couple
Speaker 2: of billion dollars of private money. But there is a
Speaker 2: there is an entire scheme in place for the Bengals
Speaker 2: to take advantage of this, and you know, I do
Speaker 2: think that this is the best way to do this.
Speaker 2: I didn't want to raise taxes the bond uh provisions
Speaker 2: that we use so often in other areas. We did
Speaker 2: that six hundred million dollars for the Brent Spence Bridge
Speaker 2: transportation capital budgets we have. We always have billions of
Speaker 2: dollars and bonds out there, but that would have added
Speaker 2: about an extra three hundred and thirty million dollars onto
Speaker 2: the costs of the taxpayer. The unclaimed funds is simply
Speaker 2: money that is sitting accumulating interest. We can't spend the interest.
Speaker 2: And the interesting thing about this one has about four
Speaker 2: point eight billion dollars. It's collecting about one hundred and
Speaker 2: ninety million in interest every year, and in non interest
Speaker 2: income it collected five hundred and twenty four million dollars
Speaker 2: only paid out one hundred and forty five The amount
Speaker 2: of money that's coming to this fund has skyrocketed over
Speaker 2: the past ten to fifteen years. I think the reason
Speaker 2: is people are losing their money on the internet place
Speaker 2: and it eventually gets turned into the state, so it's
Speaker 2: a good way to do it. We of course ensure
Speaker 2: that the Browns, the Bengals, and anyone else taking advantage
Speaker 2: of this money will create enough new revenue to pay
Speaker 2: the fund back. The Browns can't get the money or
Speaker 2: anybody else until they show the Tax Department and they
Speaker 2: show Office of Budget and Management that the project is
Speaker 2: viable and that the fund will recover its money.
Speaker 1: As far as the LOI that was signed, Alesia Reese
Speaker 1: County Commissioner and she served in the legislature for a
Speaker 1: long time maybe when you were there, has set on
Speaker 1: our air repeatedly, there's no deal that there's an LOI,
Speaker 1: letter of intent and now the lawyers get together, the
Speaker 1: George Vincent types who's brilliant in Densmore and Alex trent
Speaker 1: Tefilu who works at Densmore gets together along with the
Speaker 1: Bengal lawyers. And the Bengal lawyers are undefeated, untied, unscored
Speaker 1: on hell. Mike Brown takes the I R S to
Speaker 1: tax court and beats the IRS and tax court. So
Speaker 1: these sets of lawyers are making one thousand bucks an
Speaker 1: hour and they're going to hash it out. Well, once
Speaker 1: they hash it out and say, okay, we really have
Speaker 1: a deal, there was a lot of a lot of
Speaker 1: confetti and a drinking the champagne and were screaming, hollering
Speaker 1: and shouting about a week ago, we got a deal,
Speaker 1: we got a deal. In reality, there's not a deal.
Speaker 1: There's an understanding in the future to maybe get a deal.
Speaker 1: But if the deal is signed, you're saying that the
Speaker 1: Bengals had the capability of getting that missing three hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty million dollars out of the state quote the
Speaker 1: unplaying funds. But the deal has got to be a
Speaker 1: real deal, has got to be examined and has got
Speaker 1: to be the model rule. Can you explain to the
Speaker 1: American people, Speaker Huffman, the model rule that has to
Speaker 1: be applied. If this Bengals take money, does that solidify
Speaker 1: them in Cincinnati? They say it's eleven years. They say
Speaker 1: it used to be a thirty year, now it's eleven.
Speaker 1: Can you explain that to the American people?
Speaker 2: Sure so. But just to be clear, the amount of
Speaker 2: money that the Bengals and again anybody else building large
Speaker 2: facilities like this get, they would have to come and
Speaker 2: apply to the state for that fund and make sure
Speaker 2: that the taxes would pay back ultimately the money to
Speaker 2: the fund. And that's going to be dependent on whatever
Speaker 2: deal it is that the Bengals or the city, or
Speaker 2: the county or the NFL or whoever bring us to
Speaker 2: the state. They can convince them, hey, look, state, now,
Speaker 2: whether it's three hundred and fifty or two hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty or whatever it is, based on what's in the statue.
Speaker 2: Then someone will say, Okay, we're convinced that the folks
Speaker 2: at the Office of Budget Management, we're convinced we're going
Speaker 2: to get our money back. Here's the money, and here's
Speaker 2: all the parameters. But until there's an agreement, no one
Speaker 2: can say, oh, we're going to get this, or we're
Speaker 2: going to get that. We basically modified the Medel rule
Speaker 2: to say that, you know what the state legislature's interested
Speaker 2: in is the state of Ohio. And in this particular case,
Speaker 2: this new facility in Cuyahoga County is built about one
Speaker 2: mile outside of the city limits. Brook Park is actually
Speaker 2: about the city of Cleveland. I don't think that was
Speaker 2: ever intended to do that now. I don't think the
Speaker 2: Browns are going to move to Akron or Bima, although
Speaker 2: that would be great. But what essentially does is prevent
Speaker 2: not just penalizes, but prevents teams who have signed agreements
Speaker 2: and taken state money from leaving the state of Ohio.
Speaker 2: And again, you know that's essentially what the new rule
Speaker 2: is because you know before it was Cleveland donate. Well,
Speaker 2: they can build this new facility there and it essentially
Speaker 2: serves the same population. And again, the state of Ohio
Speaker 2: is what we care about, not necessarily the lines in
Speaker 2: a particular county.
Speaker 1: So if and when the LOI becomes a real deal,
Speaker 1: it'll be eight thousand pages long. The lawyers will get
Speaker 1: their cut of the deal. It's going to be signed,
Speaker 1: seal them, delivered, at that point the Hamleting County with
Speaker 1: the Bengals, and I guess the NFL applied to this
Speaker 1: fund to get three or four hundred million dollars. And
Speaker 1: if that happens, that's like the guarantee that the Bengals
Speaker 1: threat to move, which the Browns have done one time
Speaker 1: they go went to Baltimore, and Mike Brown one point
Speaker 1: showed up in Baltimore when the negotiations are going on.
Speaker 1: So if Ohio has put up this money, and this
Speaker 1: might be three to six months down the road, Speaker
Speaker 1: Matt Heffman, and they take the money, then it's going
Speaker 1: to be very difficult for the Bengals to leave. Is
Speaker 1: that fair to say?
Speaker 2: That's absolutely fair to say. Yeah, yeah, And again the
Speaker 2: state isn't sitting here saying how can we give this
Speaker 2: money away or how can we make these deals individual communities.
Speaker 2: I mentioned the Columbus Symphony Orchestra because they have plans
Speaker 2: for a two hundred million dollar facility. They're not maybe Columbus,
Speaker 2: Franklin County other people can raise that money, but you know,
Speaker 2: that's that's money that potentially they can apply for the
Speaker 2: fund and not just mega facilities, you know, like the
Speaker 2: Browns or the ones that we were just talking about.
Speaker 2: But but but other facilities which you know, are going
Speaker 2: to course enhance our lifestyle and a lot of people
Speaker 2: want to come here and live. You know, this facility
Speaker 2: in Cleveland is going to be, you know, state of
Speaker 2: the art. And I think you know, I think you
Speaker 2: and I agree that if the Bengals renovation happens, that
Speaker 2: it's going to be great for downtown wonder by the way,
Speaker 2: I'm a Reds fan, well I may.
Speaker 1: And at this point, part of the deal, which isn't done,
Speaker 1: I want to say as loud as I can, there
Speaker 1: is no deal between the county, the state, and the
Speaker 1: Bengals for the renovations. It's a promise to get an
Speaker 1: agreement down the road, which we hope happens. But also
Speaker 1: the Bengals are giving up a lot of control over
Speaker 1: the entire riverfront. That was stupid to give them control
Speaker 1: in the first place. It also opens up other events
Speaker 1: like Beyonce or maybe Taylor Swift to come back. And
Speaker 1: it opens up the ability of this new commission in
Speaker 1: Hamilton County to say, Okay, we're going to use pay
Speaker 1: Corpse Stadium more. All that's good stuff will see what happens. Secondly,
Speaker 1: my friends in public education say you're screwing public education
Speaker 1: by this forty percent carryover. Can you maybe, in one
Speaker 1: paragraph explain why you're not screwing public education to put
Speaker 1: those fears to rest.
Speaker 2: Well, first of all, public education is being funded an
Speaker 2: additional seven hundred million dollars through this budget. I had
Speaker 2: a reporter asked me last week. He said, what would
Speaker 2: you say to the people who are set with you
Speaker 2: for cutting funding to public education? And I said, I
Speaker 2: would tell them that they have been misinformed and they
Speaker 2: should be upset with anyone, including news outlets, that are
Speaker 2: telling them that in fact, public education is being cut.
Speaker 2: So here's what we're trying to do. There's a lot
Speaker 2: of we've got real problems with backating property tax. There
Speaker 2: are a lot of folks who are eliminated completely that
Speaker 2: may be on the ballot next year. And essentially what
Speaker 2: we've done is say, look, there are a lot of
Speaker 2: public school districts, not all of them, who are carrying over,
Speaker 2: who are getting tax money both from the state and
Speaker 2: local property and not spending it. They're spending a lot.
Speaker 2: You look at the amount of money, for example, that
Speaker 2: the Columbus Public schools are spending per child. They had
Speaker 2: a forty six percent carryover about four hundred million dollars
Speaker 2: that they didn't spend, And there are a lot of
Speaker 2: other school districts just like that. Of course, Columbus Public
Speaker 2: is way above average in terms of how much it's spent.
Speaker 2: There are other school districts like Bluffton in the Great
Speaker 2: Town of Bluffton, Ohio and Island County they only spend
Speaker 2: twelve thousand dollars per kid. The average statewide is sixteen thousand,
Speaker 2: three hundred. Go check your local school districts, see how
Speaker 2: much they're spending.
Speaker 1: For twenty three thousand, the Cincinnai twenty three thousand.
Speaker 2: Well there you go. Now, I don't know what the
Speaker 2: carryover for Cincinnati is, but if it's more than forty percent,
Speaker 2: we're simply saying the school districts, like I know, Columbus
Speaker 2: Orange School District, several others around the state. Look, all
Speaker 2: we're asking is at least return the money that you're
Speaker 2: not spending. We're not saying go back and get rid
Speaker 2: of you know, building wellness managers, which one of the
Speaker 2: school districts recently, someone told me they hired all the
Speaker 2: other you know things that school it appears that public
Speaker 2: school districts spend money on, but no other, no other
Speaker 2: governmental entity is spending the kinds of things that they're doing.
Speaker 2: And all we're saying is, can you keep spending as
Speaker 2: much money as as your local school board wants to
Speaker 2: do that, but if you have extra money that you're
Speaker 2: not using, at least return that to the taxpayer. And
Speaker 2: so we have school districts that are sixty eighty one hundred,
Speaker 2: one hundred and fifty percent carryovers, and in fact, the
Speaker 2: recommendation by school business officials is carry over at least
Speaker 2: twenty five percent. Now they're not going to put that
Speaker 2: in their talking points that they're going to send to
Speaker 2: Bill cunning In. So we have to do something about
Speaker 2: property taxes, because what are these schools going to do
Speaker 2: If this goes on the ballot next year and pass it.
Speaker 1: It's going to pay it happens, it's going to pass.
Speaker 1: I had one of your cohorts on who said, look,
Speaker 1: it's either property tax, income tax, or sales tax. And
Speaker 1: people hate all of them. The least hate full, I guess,
Speaker 1: is sales tax. You pay a little bit, but one
Speaker 1: of your Cohorts said to me, the property taxes eliminated,
Speaker 1: that means the sales tax in each county would have
Speaker 1: to be about twenty percent and income taxes would double
Speaker 1: a triple. And you haven't had to confront this yet.
Speaker 1: But as the main guy in Columbus, what do you
Speaker 1: do if property taxes are voted down? In other words,
Speaker 1: you can't use them. They don't exist anymore. What's the
Speaker 1: sales tax and income tax look like?
Speaker 2: Well, I don't think that there's going to suddenly be
Speaker 2: a push to double income tax and sales tax. What
Speaker 2: we have are talent, and I've mentioned this last time
Speaker 2: was one thousands of local taxing entities, and you know,
Speaker 2: people are willing to pay that apparently, but we may
Speaker 2: not be able to afford six hundred plus school districts
Speaker 2: and several hundred cities, townships and villages and all of
Speaker 2: the things that we pay for right now. And I
Speaker 2: think that if this passes next year, we're going to
Speaker 2: have to look at a restructuring of local government and
Speaker 2: how we do it. Now. Everybody wants to have their
Speaker 2: own local school, everybody wants their own police and fire department.
Speaker 2: You have to figure out how to pay for that.
Speaker 2: But if this thing passes next year, then what we're
Speaker 2: talking about in this budget is peanuts. People will be saying,
Speaker 2: where do I sign up for that plan that we
Speaker 2: had last year. I think that there is substantial property textually,
Speaker 2: if not just in the carryovers situation, but there's a
Speaker 2: whole number of other things. We're eliminating emergency leveles, renewal
Speaker 2: levees with increases, substitute levees, combined levees, all things that
Speaker 2: most of the public don't know about. They just end
Speaker 2: up saying, well, I'm for the kids, so I'm going
Speaker 2: to go to the.
Speaker 1: School, and they always pass.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're not.
Speaker 1: You're in Allen County. In Hamlton County, we have mentally
Speaker 1: retarded my I use that term because it's in the statute.
Speaker 1: We have senior citizen levee, we have a zoo levee,
Speaker 1: we have the library level, we have the engine level.
Speaker 1: We got all these levees. We have eleven special levees
Speaker 1: that always win. Matt Heffan, and no point does anyone
Speaker 1: ever vote against any of them. Because you got poor,
Speaker 1: hungred kids have to be fed, and the property tax
Speaker 1: is completely out of control, especially in Hamlin County, and
Speaker 1: you give us a shot to vote that down, we're going.
Speaker 2: To do it. Yeah. Look there's the other, you know,
Speaker 2: sort of improvement center. This. If the school district has
Speaker 2: more than a one hundred percent general fund carryover, they're
Speaker 2: prohibited from going to the ballot. The school district can't
Speaker 2: increase tax revenues, which is some of the things that happen.
Speaker 2: They shift the purpose of the inside melage without they
Speaker 2: have to do it with the public meeting. And these
Speaker 2: are all sort of strange words to most people, right,
Speaker 2: but this is how suddenly your taxes go up. You
Speaker 2: didn't vote for it, there wasn't a public meeting. Oh
Speaker 2: my gosh, how did that happen? So, you know, the
Speaker 2: other thing will happen. And it may not happen in
Speaker 2: the Cincinnati Public schools, but in many places, people are
Speaker 2: going to show up at their school board and say, hey,
Speaker 2: wait a minute. You suddenly have this operating extra operating
Speaker 2: money and you put it into the permanent improvement fund,
Speaker 2: and now I don't get a tax cut because of that. Well,
Speaker 2: well we're going to build a new building. Well I
Speaker 2: would have liked to remodel my bathroom with that extra
Speaker 2: tax money. So there really needs to be a local
Speaker 2: involvement in what these taxes are. And you know, I'm
Speaker 2: just as guilty as there I think. You know, my
Speaker 2: local school ever comes up, I vote for it in
Speaker 2: the park and all of those things. But you know,
Speaker 2: there are a lot of people, of course paying these
Speaker 2: taxes that don't get to vote, and there are a
Speaker 2: lot of people who don't pay the taxes who do
Speaker 2: get to vote. And the question really needs to be
Speaker 2: what is it that we can do to make sure
Speaker 2: I think the current question is what do we do
Speaker 2: to ensure the public that next year's potential ballot initiative
Speaker 2: isn't necessary, that we've made the changes in this budget,
Speaker 2: and if folks aren't convinced, then we are looking at
Speaker 2: local government armageddon next year.
Speaker 1: It will be armageddon. But nonetheless, I like the Tony Benders,
Speaker 1: rich and famous, my producer. He likes the two point
Speaker 1: seventy five percent cap on high income Americans so they
Speaker 1: pay less money in state taxes, which I like to
Speaker 1: a little bit. But Matt Huffman, we're going to have
Speaker 1: on the governor Tuesday or Wednesday. He's got till midnight
Speaker 1: tonight to veto line out in veto, it can be overruled.
Speaker 1: But you told me off the air. Depends what the
Speaker 1: issue is. You're not sure yet what's going to be vetoed,
Speaker 1: what's not. Then you get back together. The pow wow
Speaker 1: happens Tuesday and Wednesday, override the veto and the way
Speaker 1: we go. But Speaker of the House, Matt Huffman, once again,
Speaker 1: thanks for setting the record strait, especially about the Browns
Speaker 1: and Bengals. And you continue to have a great day,
Speaker 1: and thank you, mister speaker.
Speaker 2: All right, thanks Bill, God bless thank you, very.
Speaker 1: God bless all. Let's continue with more. There you have it.
Speaker 1: So until there's a deal, is there a deal with
Speaker 1: the Bengals. Watching the media, we got a deal. In reality,
Speaker 1: there's no deal. Bill Cunningham, News Radio seven hundred WLW