Ohio Environmental Council opposes Senate Bill 63 limiting local governance and election reforms

The Ohio Senate General Government Committee convened on March 11, 2025, to discuss Senate Bill 63, which seeks to ban ranked choice voting (RCV) in the state. The meeting featured testimony from various stakeholders, including environmental advocates and local government representatives, who expressed strong opposition to the bill.

Spencer Dierig, vice president of government affairs for the Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund, argued that Senate Bill 63 undermines local democracy and restricts communities' ability to govern themselves. He emphasized that the bill imposes a one-size-fits-all approach that does not account for the unique needs of Ohio's cities and counties. Dierig highlighted the importance of local home rule, which allows communities to adopt electoral systems that reflect their values, including RCV and proportional representation. He cited studies showing that RCV can increase voter turnout and engagement, particularly in historically underrepresented communities.

Trevor Martin, a Columbus resident with experience in RCV, echoed Dierig's concerns, stating that the bill would limit voter choice and participation. He shared his positive experiences with RCV in San Francisco, where a significant majority of voters support its continuation. Martin also pointed out that RCV has been linked to higher turnout rates and better representation for women and people of color in elected offices.

Kyle Herman, a city council member from Stowe, reinforced the idea that local governments should have the authority to decide their electoral methods. He argued that RCV could help address issues of political dysfunction and promote a healthier democratic process. Herman urged the committee to respect local governance and allow communities to explore RCV as an option.

In contrast, proponents of Senate Bill 63, including Harry Rupp from the Stop Ranked Choice Voting Coalition, argued that RCV leads to confusion and disenfranchisement among voters. Rupp cited examples from other states where RCV has been implemented, claiming it has resulted in delays and complications during elections.

The committee's discussions highlighted a significant divide over the future of electoral reform in Ohio. Opponents of Senate Bill 63 argue that it restricts local governance and voter engagement, while supporters claim it protects election integrity. The outcome of this legislation could have lasting implications for how elections are conducted in Ohio, as well as the ability of local communities to determine their electoral processes. The committee is expected to continue deliberating on the bill in the coming weeks.