Ohio Issue 1, Environmental Bonds Act (2000)
|Ohio Issue 1 (2000)|
Text of measure
The language that appeared on the ballot:
(Proposed by Resolution of the General Assembly of Ohio)
To adopt Section 2o of Article VIII of the Constitution of the State of Ohio.
This proposed amendment would:
If adopted, this amendment shall take immediate effect.
SHALL THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BE ADOPTED?
The following reasons were given in support of Issue 1 by the Committee to Prepare Argument For Issue 1:
State Issue 1 would allow the State of Ohio to issue $400 million in bonds for the conservation and revitalization of land and water in our state.
Issue 1 seeks to improve and preserve the quality of life for all Ohioans:
How does Issue 1 work?
Two funds of $200 million each would be created. The conservation fund would be used to preserve open space, maintain local watersheds, and develop bike paths and other recreational trails. The revitalization fund would support brownfields cleanup and redevelopment, as well as urban renewal. Eligible projects would include site acquisition, demolition, and pollution cleanup.
Issue 1 would contribute to a clean, safe and healthy environment for all Ohioans, leaving a legacy that future generations deserve.
Vote YES on State Issue 1.
The following reasons were given in opposition of Issue 1 by the Committee to Prepare Argument Against Issue 1:
Issue 1 proposes a Constitutional amendment to allow the state to issue new debt of up to $400 million evenly split for land conservation and land revitalization purposes. The $400 million can be reissued, without a vote of the people, as it is retired and the fund would operate in perpetuity. The new debt authority, similar to a person getting his/her debt limit raised on a credit card, is unnecessary considering the following.
Issue 1 is a poorly targeted program that will have little impact on urban sprawl, farmland protection, or urban revitalization. This program would conserve less than 1% of Ohio’s farmland and open space at a cost of hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars.
According to the Legislative Budget Office (LBO), the cost of repaying the $200 million for conservation purposes over 20 years could reach $303 million. LBO also estimates the cost of repaying the $200 million for revitalization purposes over 20 years could exceed $308 million.
The allocation of funds for land conservation and land revitalization should be subject to the public budget process, which would allow for the approval of projects before the allocation of funding; therefore, the issuance of new debt is not necessary. The State should not be given the authority to issue new debt for a program that is a token attempt at conservation and revitalization.
Vote NO on Issue 1.
- Ohio 2000 ballot measures
- 2000 ballot measures
- List of Ohio ballot measures
- List of ballot measures by year
- List of ballot measures by state
- Ohio ballot measures and election results
- A History of Statewide Issue Votes in Ohio
- Ohio 2000 ballot measure voter's guide
- ↑ Ohio Secretary of State, "2000 Official Election Results," accessed July 29, 2013
- ↑ Ohio Secretary of State, "A History of Statewide Issue Votes in Ohio," accessed July 29, 2013
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Ohio Issues Report, "State Issues Ballot Information for the November 7, 2000 General Election," Accessed July 29, 2013