Ohio Issue 1, Establish the Citizens Redistricting Commission Initiative (2024)

Ohio Issue 1
Election date November 5, 2024
Topic Redistricting measures
Status d Defeated
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens

Ohio Issue 1, the Establish the Citizens Redistricting Commission Initiative, was on the ballot in Ohio as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 5, 2024. The ballot measure was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported establishing the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC), a 15-member non-politician commission responsible for adopting state legislative and congressional redistricting plans.

A "no" vote opposed establishing the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC), thus keeping the existing Ohio Redistricting Commission, a politician commission established in 2015 for state legislative districts, and the process established for congressional districts in 2018.

Election results

Ohio Issue 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		2,531,900	46.29%
No		2,937,489	53.71%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What would the ballot initiative have changed about redistricting in Ohio?

See also: Summary of ballot measure provisions

The citizen-initiated constitutional amendment would have established the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC), which would have been responsible for adopting state legislative and congressional redistricting plans. The CRC would have replaced the Ohio Redistricting Commission, established in 2015 for state legislative districts, and the process established for congressional districts in 2018.

The commission would have had 15 members: five Republicans, five Democrats, and five individuals who are independents or members of other political parties. The ballot measure would have created a screening panel of four retired judges, two Republicans and two Democrats, to review and screen applicants interested in serving as commission members. The screening panel would have been required to consider commission applicants' "qualifications, conflicts of interest, party affiliation, relevant experiences and skills, community ties, and commitment to impartiality, compromise, and fairness."

The ballot initiative would have required the commission's actions and deliberations to be conducted in public meetings. Actions would have required the affirmative vote of at least nine (of 15) commissioners, including at least two Republicans, two Democrats, and two independents. The ballot measure would have required that, no later than September 19, 2025, and by July 15 of every year ending in one (2031, 2041, and so on), the commission adopt final redistricting plans.

The ballot measure would have required that "the statewide proportion of districts … that favors each political party shall correspond closely to the statewide partisan preferences of the voters of Ohio."

As of 2024, the Ohio Constitution included language about favoring or disfavoring political parties and statewide partisan preferences. However, there was disagreement over the extent to which these provisions were requirements or aspirational standards, as noted in a motion from Senate President Matt Huffman (R) and former House Speaker Bob Cupp (R). Unlike the existing provisions, Issue 1 would have provided a method for determining partisan preferences in redistricting, which is described below.

Under Issue 1, districts would have been required to be contiguous and in compliance with the U.S. Constitution and federal laws, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Commissioners would also have been required to consider communities of interest and the ability of "politically cohesive and geographically proximate racial, ethnic, and language minorities to participate in the political process and to elect candidates of choice."

How would Ohio have compared to other states?

See also: Comparison to other states

Ohio would have been the ninth state to establish a non-politician commission for congressional redistricting and the tenth state for state legislative redistricting. As of 2024, the most recent states to establish non-politician commissions were Colorado and Michigan in 2018.

As of 2024, 34 states had legislature-dominated redistricting processes for state legislative redistricting. Ohio was one of five states with a politician commission for state legislative redistricting. Thirty-three (33) states, including Ohio, had legislature-dominated redistricting processes for congressional redistricting. However, Ohio's process involved conditional steps that could include the politician commission.

Voters in Ohio had twice rejected ballot initiatives to create a non-politician redistricting commission. In 2012, voters rejected Issue 2, which would have created a 12-person commission. In 2005, voters rejected Issue 4, which would have created a five-person commission.

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding the ballot initiative?

See also: Support, Opposition, and Campaign finance

A combined total of $50.97 million was raised for and against Issue 1, making the ballot initiative the most expensive related to redistricting since at least 2005. Supporters received six times more funding than opponents.

Citizens Not Politicians led the campaign supporting Issue 1. The PAC received $43.43 million, including $10.70 million from Article IV, $6.67 million from the Sixteen Thirty Fund, and $4.45 million from the Our American Future Foundation. Supporters included former Ohio Supreme Court Justices Yvette McGee Brown (D) and Maureen O'Connor (R), Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-23), and House Minority Leader Allison Russo (D-7); several labor unions, including the Ohio AFL-CIO and Ohio Education Association; and nonprofit organizations like the ACLU, Ohio NAACP, and Planned Parenthood of Ohio. Sen. Antonio said, "With a citizen-led redistricting commission, we can restore the people’s trust in our government and build a healthier system that holds elected representatives accountable." U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries' (D) PAC contributed to the campaign.

Ohio Works led the campaign opposing Issue 1. The PAC received $7.54 million, including $1.75 million from the American Jobs and Growth PAC, $1.20 million from Ohioans for a Healthy Economy, and $560,000 from the Ohio Manufacturers' Association. Opponents included Gov. Mike DeWine (R), Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R), Senate President Matt Huffman (R), House Speaker Jason Stephens (R), along with organizations like the Ohio Manufacturers' Association, Ohio Oil and Gas Association, Ohio Chamber of Commerce, and Ohio Farm Bureau. Former President Donald Trump (R) endorsed a 'no' vote, saying, "Ohio voters need to stop this Democrat takeover of legislative redistricting." PACs for U.S. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R) and U.S. House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R) contributed to the opposition campaign, and U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R) spoke at a fundraising event.

Measure design

Click on the following sections for summaries of the different provisions of the ballot measure.

Expand All

Membership of the Citizens Redistricting Commission

The commission would have been composed of 15 members: five Republicans, five Democrats, and five individuals who were independents or members of other political parties. Their partisan affiliations would have been determined based on their primary voting records.

Commissioners would have been required to have lived in Ohio for both the current year and the previous six years.

The following individuals, along with their immediate family members, would have been prohibited from serving as commissioners:

Current elected or appointed federal, state, or local officials, as well as those who held such positions within the past six years;

• Individuals who had been candidates for any federal, state, or local office within the past six years;
• Individuals who had served as a staff member, paid consultant, or contractor for an elected official or candidate within the past six years; and
• Individuals who had been registered lobbyists or legislative agents within the past six years.

Commissioners would also have been prohibited from holding elective or appointive state office in Ohio for six years following the certification of the state legislative redistricting plan.

Vote requirements for passing redistricting plans

Issue 1 would have required the approval of at least nine commissioners to adopt redistricting plans, including at least two Democrats, two Republicans, and two independent commissioners. All votes, decisions, and discussions would have occurred in public meetings. If the commission had failed to adopt redistricting plans by the deadline, each commissioner would have been permitted to submit one redistricting plan for consideration in a ranked voting process. Each commissioner would have ranked the submitted plans in order of preference. If a plan had received a majority of first-position rankings, it would have been adopted. If no plan received a majority of first-position rankings, points would have been allocated based on the commissioners' rankings: one point for every first-place vote, two points for every second-place vote, and so on until all votes were accounted for each submitted plan. The plan with the most points would have been eliminated, and the rankings and point totals of the remaining plans would have been adjusted to reflect the elimination. This process would have continued until a redistricting plan received a majority of first-position rankings, with that plan becoming the adopted plan.

Criteria for redistricting plans

The commission-approved redistricting plans would have been required to adhere to the U.S. Constitution and applicable federal laws, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Plans would have been designed to "ban partisan gerrymandering and prohibit the use of redistricting plans that favor one political party and disfavor others," according to the text. The ballot measure would have required that the statewide proportion of districts favoring each political party "correspond closely to the statewide partisan preferences of the voters of Ohio." Deviations between the statewide proportion of districts and statewide partisan preferences would have been limited to no more than 3 percentage points or the smallest possible deviation above three points when arithmetically impossible.

The statewide proportion of districts and statewide partisan preferences would have been determined as follows:

• Statewide proportion of districts: The commission would have (1) calculated how many districts in the redistricting plan would have been won by Democratic and Republican candidates in each statewide partisan general election held in the past six years; (2) calculated the proportion that would have been won by Democratic and Republican candidates in each election; and (3) found the median of these proportions for Democrats and Republicans.
• Statewide partisan preferences: The commission would have (1) calculated the statewide two-party vote that Democrats and Republicans received in each statewide partisan general election contest held in the preceding six years and (2) found the median of these proportions for Democrats and Republicans.

The ballot measure would have also prohibited commissioners from considering the home locations of current elected officials or candidates.

The Citizens Redistricting Commission would have also considered the following criteria, prioritized in this order:

• districts for the same office would have been "reasonably equal in total population;"
• districts would have been designed to allow racial, ethnic, and language minorities an equal functional ability to "participate in the political process and to elect candidates of choice;" and
• districts would have aimed, to the extent practicable, to preserve communities of interest, defined as "communities of people with broadly shared interests and representational needs," excluding those "based on a shared political identity or common relationships with political parties or political candidates."

Selection of redistricting commissioners

The ballot measure would have established a Bipartisan Screening Panel (BSP) consisting of four retired judges: two Democrats and two Republicans. The Ohio Ballot Board would have selected the four retired judges from a list of applicants.

The BSP would have managed the application process and overseen the selection of commissioners for the Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC). The BSP would have hired a professional search firm based on specific criteria, such as "specialization in screening high-level public sector employees." This firm would have solicited applications for commissioners, screened and provided information about applicants, checked references, and assisted in reviewing and interviewing applications. The application process would have been required to "promote applications from a geographically and demographically representative cross-section of Ohio."

The application form for those interested in serving on the CRC would have required information about the applicant’s qualifications, conflicts of interest, party affiliation, relevant experiences and skills, community ties, and commitment to impartiality, compromise, and fairness.

An applicant's party affiliation would have been determined "based on the applicant’s voting record in party primaries" and other relevant factors, such as political contributions and campaign activities, including whether an applicant had voted in two consecutive even-year primary elections for the same political party.

The BSP would have then selected 90 applicants—30 Democrats, 30 Republicans, and 30 individuals who were independents or members of other political parties. The BSP would have created a portal for public comment on the applicants and directed the search firm to interview them. Following this, 45 applicants would have been selected—15 from each partisan grouping. The BSP would have randomly selected six applicants to serve as commissioners, two from each partisan grouping.

The six commissioners would have subsequently selected the remaining nine, three from each partisan grouping. A majority vote would have been required for selection, including at least one vote from a Democrat, one from a Republican, and one from an independent.

Legal challenges against redistricting plans

The ballot measure would have provided that any registered Ohio voter could seek a review of an adopted redistricting plan by filing a petition within 10 days of the commission issuing a final report on the adopted redistricting plans. The Ohio Supreme Court would have had exclusive, original jurisdiction in cases contending that the redistricting plans failed to "ban partisan gerrymandering and prohibit the use of redistricting plans that favor one political party and disfavor others." The Ohio Supreme Court would have provided an expedited review process. The justices would have unanimously selected two special masters from a pre-established pool created by a Bipartisan Screening Panel. If they were unable to agree, the court's administrative director would have randomly selected from the pool. The special masters would have reviewed the challenges, held public hearings, and compiled a report on whether the redistricting plan complied with the constitutional requirements. If a petitioner or the commission disagreed with the report, they could have objected. If there were no objections to the report, the Ohio Supreme Court would have adopted the report as "the final, non-reviewable decision of the court." If objections existed, the court would have reviewed the report and issued an opinion upholding or rejecting the objections. If the final decision held that there were violations, the commission would have reconvened to make necessary adjustments. If the commission failed to make the adjustments, the court would have ordered the special masters to make the adjustments.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The official ballot title was as follows:

Note: Use your mouse to scroll over the text below to view the ballot language.

Issue 1 To create an appointed redistricting commission not elected by or subject to removal by the voters of the state Proposed Constitutional Amendment Proposed by Initiative Petition To repeal Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of Article XI, Repeal sections 1, 2 and 3 of Article XIX, And enact Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of Article XX of the Constitution of the State of Ohio A majority yes vote is necessary for the amendment to pass.

The proposed amendment would:

1. Repeal constitutional protections against gerrymandering approved by nearly three-quarters of Ohio electors participating in the statewide elections of 2015 and 2018, and eliminate the longstanding ability of Ohio citizens to hold their representatives accountable for establishing fair state legislative and congressional districts.

2. Establish a new taxpayer-funded commission of appointees required to gerrymander the boundaries of state legislative and congressional districts to favor either of the two largest political parties in the state of Ohio, according to a formula based on partisan outcomes as the dominant factor, so that:

A. Each district shall contain single-member districts that are geographically contiguous, but state legislative and congressional districts will no longer be required to be compact; and

B. Counties, townships and cities throughout Ohio can be split and divided across multiple districts, and preserving communities of interest will be secondary to the formula that is based on partisan political outcomes.

3. Require that a majority of the partisan commission members belong to the state's two largest political parties.

4. Prevent a commission member from being removed, except by a vote of their fellow commission members, even for incapacity, willful neglect of duty or gross misconduct.

5. Prohibit any citizen from filing a lawsuit challenging a redistricting plan in any court, except if the lawsuit challenges the proportionality standard applied by the commission, requirements pertaining to an incumbent elected official's residence, or the expiration of certain senators' terms, and then only before the Ohio Supreme Court.

6. Create the following process for appointing commission members: Four partisan appointees on the Ohio Ballot Board will choose a panel of 4 partisan retired judges (2 affiliated with the first major political party and 2 affiliated with the second major political party). Provide that the 4 legislative appointees of the Ohio Ballot Board would be responsible for appointing the panel members as follows: the Ballot Board legislative appointees affiliated with the same major political party would select 8 applicants and present those to the Ballot Board legislative appointees affiliated with the other major political party, who would then select 2 persons from the 8 for appointment to the panel, resulting in 4 panel appointees. The panel would then hire a private professional search firm to help them choose 6 of the 15 individuals on the commission. The panel will choose those 6 individuals by initially creating a pool of 90 individuals (30 from the first major political party, 30 from the second major political party, and 30 from neither the first nor second major political parties). The panel of 4 partisan retired judges will create a portal for public comment on the applicants and will conduct and publicly broadcast interviews with each applicant in the pool. The panel will then narrow the pool of 90 individuals down to 45 (15 from the first major political party; 15 from the second major political party; and 15 from neither the first nor second major political parties). Randomly, by draw, the 4 partisan retired judges will then blindly select 6 names out of the pool of 45 to be members of the commission (2 from the first major political party; 2 from the second major political party; and 2 from neither the first nor second major political parties). The 6 randomly drawn individuals will then review the applications of the remaining 39 individuals not randomly drawn and select the final 9 individuals to serve with them on the commission, the majority of which shall be from the first and the second major political parties (3 from the first major political party, 3 from the second major political party, and 3 from neither the first nor second major political parties).

7. Require the affirmative votes of 9 of 15 members of the appointed commission to create legislative and congressional districts. If the commission is not able to determine a plan by September 19, 2025, or July 15 of every year ending in one, the following impasse procedure will be used: for any plan at an impasse, each commissioner shall have 3 days to submit no more than one proposed redistricting plan to be subject to a commission vote through a ranked-choice selection process, with the goal of having a majority of the commission members rank one of those plans first. If a majority cannot be obtained, the plan with the highest number of points in the ranked-choice process is eliminated, and the process is repeated until a plan receives a majority of first-place rankings. If the ranked-choice process ends in a tie for the highest point total, the tie shall be broken through a random process.

8. Limit the right of Ohio citizens to freely express their opinions to members of the commission or to commission staff regarding the redistricting process or proposed redistricting plans, other than through designated meetings, hearings and an online public portal, and would forbid communication with the commission members and staff outside those contexts.

9. Require the commission to immediately create new legislative and congressional districts in 2025 to replace the most recent districts adopted by the citizens of Ohio through their elected representatives.

10. Impose new taxpayer-funded costs on the State of Ohio to pay the commission members, the commission staff and appointed special masters, professionals, and private consultants that the commission is required to hire; and an unlimited amount for legal expenses incurred by the commission in any related litigation.

If approved, the amendment will be effective 30 days after the election.

SHALL THE AMENDMENT BE APPROVED?

Constitutional changes

The ballot measure would have added a new article, Article XX, to the Ohio Constitution and repealed Article XI and Article XIX. The following underlined text would have been added and struck-through text would have been deleted:

Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.

Article XX

Section 1. Establishment of the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission

(A) To ensure an open and transparent process and fair outcomes that preserve the political power inherent in the people, the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission is hereby established upon the effective date of this article and shall be responsible for adopting a redistricting plan for the general assembly and a redistricting plan for the United States House of Representatives, as provided in this article.

(B) Redistricting and the operations of the commission shall be governed in accordance with the procedural and substantive requirements set forth in this article.

(C) The commission shall consist of fifteen members who have demonstrated the absence of any disqualifying conflicts of interest and who have shown an ability to conduct the redistricting process with impartiality, integrity, and fairness. Membership on the commission shall consist of:

(1) Five members who are affiliated with the First Major Party;

(2) Five members who are affiliated with the Second Major Party;

(3) Five members who are independent.

(D)The commission shall be constituted and convened no later than May 16, 2025, and no later than January 16 of every year ending in one for subsequent redistricting cycles.

(E) The term of office for each member of the commission shall expire upon the appointment of the first member of the succeeding commission.

Section 2. Establishment of Bipartisan Screening Panel; Screening of Applicants; Formation of the Commission

(A) A bipartisan screening panel is hereby established upon the effective date of this article to review and screen applicants interested in serving as members of the commission. The bipartisan screening panel shall consist of four retired judges, two of whom affiliate with the First Major Party and two of whom affiliate with the Second Major Party.

(B) In the initial 2024-2025 redistricting cycle and in each subsequent redistricting cycle, members of the bipartisan screening panel shall be selected as follows:

(1) The four members of the Ohio ballot board who were appointed by members of the general assembly shall convene to oversee selection of the bipartisan screening panel. All administrative and operational support for this selection shall be provided by the Department of Administrative Services.

(2) The four members of the ballot board convened under section 2(B)(1) of this article shall make available an application form no later than December 16, 2024, and no later than May 1 of every year ending in zero, that interested retired judges shall use to apply to be a member of the bipartisan screening panel. The form shall require that an interested retired judge submit sufficient information to enable the four members of the ballot board to assess the judge’s qualifications and ability to be impartial and competent, and to carry out required duties with full public confidence. To be eligible to serve on the bipartisan screening panel, a retired judge shall satisfy all the requirements of section 3 of this article. In addition, a retired judge shall attest that he or she has had no known communication material to redistricting matters with anyone ineligible under section 3(C) of this article during the sixty days prior to the submission of his or her application and that he or she is and will continue to be otherwise free from conflicts of interest. The deadline for interested retired judges to submit applications to the ballot board is 30 days after the application first becomes available.

(3) After submission of applications, the bipartisan screening panel shall be constituted as follows:

(a) The members of the ballot board who affiliate with the First Major Party shall review the applications of retired judges who affiliate with the First Major Party and provide a list of eight eligible applicants and their applications to the two members of the ballot board who affiliate with the Second Major Party. The members of the ballot board who affiliate with the Second Major Party shall review the applications of retired judges who affiliate with the Second Major Party and provide a list of eight eligible applicants and their applications to the two members of the ballot board who affiliate with the First Major Party.

(b) From these lists, the members of the ballot board affiliated with the First Major Party then shall select two judges affiliated with the Second Major Party, and the members of the ballot board affiliated with the Second Major Party shall select two judges affiliated with the First Major Party.

(c) The members of the bipartisan screening panel shall be selected no later than January 30, 2025, and no later than June 30 of every year ending in zero.

(C) During his or her service on the bipartisan screening panel, each member of the panel must promptly disclose any contacts with any person disqualified from service on the commission under section 3(C) of this article and can be removed by a unanimous vote of other members of the bipartisan screening panel for any of the causes set forth in section 4(C)(1), (3), (4), or (5) of this article. In the event of resignation or removal, a replacement will be appointed from the same list and using the same process as for the original appointment. Members of the bipartisan screening panel shall be paid a per diem equal to the per diem paid to a judge assigned to serve on a court of appeals in Ohio.

(D) Once constituted, the bipartisan screening panel shall administer the application process and conduct the commissioner selection process in a manner that is impartial, transparent, and fair and that promotes applications from a geographically and demographically representative cross-section of Ohio.

(1) To assist it in its duties, the bipartisan screening panel shall engage a professional search firm to solicit applications for commissioner, screen and provide information about applicants, check references, and otherwise facilitate the application review and applicant interview process.

(a) Upon approval of this article, and in each year ending with zero, the Department of Administrative Services shall design and issue a request for proposals from interested professional search firms, including soliciting information necessary for a conflict-of-interest check, and shall contract with the chosen professional search firm. The Department of Administrative Services shall create a list of no more than three recommended professional search firms and provide it to the bipartisan screening panel.

(b) From the list provided by the Department of Administrative Services, the bipartisan screening panel shall select a professional search firm based on its specialization in screening high-level public sector employees, professional and technological capability to carry out the process, including investigations of applicants and public broadcasting of interviews, an ability to abide by the requirements of open meetings and public records laws, and, during the current year and for six years preceding the application deadline, absence of any conflicts of interests or connections or relationships with interested parties, including, but not limited to, any employment of or contracting relationships or other involvement with elected officials or candidates for office, or any contractual relationships or other involvement with political parties, ballot measure campaigns, or political action committees.

(2) The form used by applicants interested in serving on the commission shall obtain all required disclosures and information necessary for the bipartisan screening panel to determine each applicant’s qualifications, conflicts of interest, party affiliation, relevant experiences and skills, community ties, and commitment to impartiality, compromise, and fairness.

(a) Party affiliation shall be determined based on the applicant’s voting record in party primaries and various other relevant factors including, but not limited to, political contributions, campaign activities, and other reliable indicia of partisan affiliation.

(b) An applicant who has voted in two consecutive even-year primary elections for the same political party in the six years immediately preceding the application deadline shall be presumed to be affiliated with that party unless relevant factors demonstrate otherwise.

(c) All applications shall be submitted under penalty of perjury by a deadline set by the bipartisan screening panel.

(3) The bipartisan screening panel shall provide adequate public notice of the application process and accept applications for a period adequate to gather applications from a geographically and demographically representative crosssection of Ohio.

(4) After the close of the application period, the bipartisan screening panel shall review submitted applications and by majority vote create a pool of ninety applicants who are qualified to serve on the commission pursuant to sections 3(A) and (C) of this article, who have made requisite disclosures pursuant to section 3(B) of this article, and who collectively form a geographically and demographically representative cross-section of Ohio. This applicant pool shall consist of thirty applicants affiliated with the First Major Party, thirty applicants affiliated with the Second Major Party, and thirty applicants who are independent.

(5) The bipartisan screening panel shall make public the name, the current municipality or township of residence, and the partisan affiliation, if any, of each person in the applicant pool and shall create a portal for public comment on the applicants. Members of the bipartisan screening panel, in conjunction with the search firm, shall conduct or direct the search firm to conduct and publicly broadcast interviews with each applicant in the pool that examine the applicant’s partisan affiliation, relevant experience and skills, community ties, and commitment to impartiality, compromise, and fairness.

(6) After reviewing public comments and conducting interviews, the bipartisan screening panel shall select and publish a list of forty-five finalists for commissioner who are well qualified and collectively form a geographically and demographically representative cross-section of Ohio. The finalists shall include fifteen applicants affiliated with the First Major Party, fifteen applicants affiliated with the Second Major Party, and fifteen independent applicants.

(7) In a public meeting not later than three days after publication of the finalist list, the bipartisan screening panel shall randomly draw six commissioners from the finalists. Two shall be affiliated with the First Major Party, two shall be affiliated with the Second Major Party, and two shall be independent.

(8) The initial six commissioners shall review the applications, public comments, and interview records of the remaining finalists and, in a subsequent public meeting held within 21 days of their selection as commissioners, select nine additional commissioners from the remaining applicants in the pool, three of whom are affiliated with the First Major Party, three of whom are affiliated with the Second Major Party, and three of whom are independent. To be selected, an applicant must receive affirmative votes from a majority of the initial six commissioners including the votes of at least one commissioner affiliated with the First Major Party, one commissioner affiliated with the Second Major Party, and one independent commissioner. These selections shall be based on the strength of the applications and shall ensure that the commission reflects the geographic and demographic diversity of Ohio.

(E) Within 60 days of the deadline contained in section 1(D) of this article, the bipartisan screening panel with the assistance of the professional search firm shall create by a majority vote a pool of at least six potential special masters who are willing to serve if needed, in the event of a legal challenge to a redistricting plan under section 8 of this article.

(1) A person may not be included in the pool of potential special masters unless the person has established that he or she is not disqualified pursuant to section 3(C) of this article, has made disclosures pursuant to section 3(B) of this article, and has been screened by the bipartisan screening panel and determined to have: (a) The skill, knowledge, and ability to analyze redistricting plans and, if needed, produce redistricting plans that satisfy all requirements of this constitution and federal law, and in accordance with the record before the court;

(b) A lack of contractual relationships with any political party, political action committee, office holder, candidate, or party-affiliated organization in the preceding six years;

(c) A lack of substantive communications regarding redistricting matters in the preceding six years with any individual disqualified pursuant to section 3(C) of this article; and

(d) A lack of any relationships, connections, personal or professional activities or affiliations, or conflicts of interest that may undermine public trust in the independence of potential special masters or the integrity of the redistricting process.

(2) The bipartisan screening panel shall remove from the pool the name of any potential special master whom the panel determines no longer satisfies the qualification requirements in section 2(E)(1) of this article or who is no longer available to serve. A person included in the pool of potential special masters shall notify the bipartisan screening panel immediately if any of the information provided to the panel during the screening process changes or if he or she is no longer willing or able to serve as a special master.

(F) The terms of members of the bipartisan screening panel shall expire upon the certification by the Secretary of State of redistricting plans for the general assembly and United States House of Representatives for each redistricting cycle.

Section 3. Qualifications; disclosures; post service restriction

(A)To be eligible to serve, a commissioner shall be a resident of Ohio who has continuously resided in the state during the current year and immediately preceding six years and shall be an elector in good standing at the time of application.

(B) Each applicant seeking to serve on the commission shall disclose:

(1) Contributions made by the applicant to federal, state, or local candidates for elective office, political parties, or political action committees, including direct and in-kind contributions, during the current year and immediately preceding six years;

(2) The applicant’s history of partisan affiliations, including primary ballots voted, non-monetary contributions to political campaigns, and any other political engagement, including, but not limited to, involvement in political campaigns or other political organizations whether paid or volunteer;

(3) The identity of family members who would be ineligible under section 3(C) of this article; and

(4) Personal or professional relationships with persons during the current year or the immediately preceding six years who would be ineligible under section 3(C) of this article; and

(5) All financial information required by law.

(C) The following persons shall be ineligible to serve on the commission, on the bipartisan screening panel, as a special master, or as staff, a professional, or a consultant to the commission:

(1) Current elected or appointive officials to federal, state, or local office and their immediate family members;

(2) Persons who have served in any federal, state, or local elective or appointive office in Ohio for any period during the current year and immediately preceding six years and their immediate family members;

(3) Persons who have been a candidate for any federal, state, or local elective office in Ohio during the current year or immediately preceding six years and their immediate family members;

(4) Persons who have served as an officer, paid consultant, or contractor to any political party, political action committee, or campaign committee at the federal, state, or local level for any period during the current year and immediately preceding six years and their immediate family members;

(5) Persons who have served as a staff member, paid consultant, or contractor for any elected official or candidate for any federal, state, or local office for any period during the current year and immediately preceding six years and their immediate family members;

(6) Persons who have been a registered lobbyist or legislative agent with the State of Ohio or the federal government for any period during the current year and immediately preceding six years and their immediate family members.

(D) Commissioners shall be ineligible to hold elective or appointive state office in Ohio for six years following the certification of the redistricting plan for the general assembly.

Section 4. Commission internal governance and staff

(A) All deliberations and actions of the commission shall be in public meetings and all actions by the commission shall require the affirmative vote of at least nine commissioners, including the vote of at least two commissioners affiliated with the First Major Party, two commissioners affiliated with the Second Major Party, and two independent commissioners. The presence of nine commissioners shall constitute a quorum.

(B) At the first meeting of the full commission, the commission shall select two members to serve as co-chairs. The co-chairs may not have the same partisan affiliation. The co-chairs shall be responsible for presiding over meetings of the commission on an alternating basis and performing such other administrative duties as designated by the commission.

(C) A commissioner shall be removed only by the commission and only for cause after notice, a public hearing, and an opportunity for members of the public to comment. Any of the following shall be cause for removal:

(1) Knowing failure to disclose information pursuant to section 3 of this article;

(2) Willful disregard for the provisions in section 5 of this article;

(3) Wanton and willful neglect of duty or gross misconduct or malfeasance in office;

(4) Incapacity or inability to perform his or her duties; or

(5) Behavior involving moral turpitude or other acts that undermine the public’s trust in the commission and the redistricting process.

(D)The commission shall fill any vacancy on the commission by selecting from the list established pursuant to section 2(D)(6) a finalist with the same partisan affiliation as the removed or resigned commissioner.

(E) The commission shall retain staff, professionals, and consultants as needed to assist with the responsibilities, duties, and operations of the commission. All staff, professionals, and consultants shall be retained through a public application process undertaken with the assistance of the Department of Administrative Services. All applicants seeking to serve the commission as a member of staff, a professional, or a consultant shall be subject to the disclosure requirements and disqualifications in sections 3(B) and (C) of this article. Commission staff shall include the following positions:

(1) Executive director and other administrative staff to assist with facilitating broad public participation in redistricting including, but not limited to, public outreach, transparency, scheduling hearings, data management, and deployment of technology.

(2) Legal counsel with demonstrated experience in compliance and redistricting and, in particular, in enforcing or otherwise applying the Voting Rights Act of 1965; and

(3) Demographer or demographers with district mapping experience.

(F) Commissioners and commission staff, professionals, and consultants shall owe a duty to the commission as a whole and shall act in the utmost public interest of the people of Ohio and not that of any party, individual, or special interest.

Section 5. Redistricting process

(A) The commission shall conduct its hearings in a manner that invites broad public participation throughout the state, including by using technology to broadcast commission meetings and to facilitate meaningful participation from a range of Ohioans.

(1) In performing their duties, commissioners and commission staff, professionals, and consultants shall adhere to all applicable public records and open meetings laws.

(2) Commissioners and commission staff, professionals, and consultants shall not communicate with any outside person about the redistricting process or redistricting plan outcomes other than through designated public meetings or official commission portals.

(3) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall attempt to contact any member or members of the commission or commission staff, professional, or consultants with the intent to influence the redistricting process or redistricting plan outcomes other than through designated public meetings or official commission portals. Any communication received by a commissioner or commission staff, professionals, or consultants in violation of this provision shall be immediately disclosed to the commission as a whole including legal counsel. If the commission determines that the communication is a material violation of this provision and that the identity of the person who made the communication and the subject matter of that communication are of public interest, the commission shall vote on whether to make such information public.

(B) Before adopting any redistricting plan, the commission shall hold at least three rounds of public meetings:

(1) Prior to the release of draft redistricting plans, but not later than July 11, 2025, and not later than May 1 of every year ending in one, the commission shall hold at least five initial input hearings to gather information from the public on communities of interest and other factors that Ohioans believe should inform the commission’s creation of redistricting plans. Hearings shall take place in all five regions of Ohio, with at least one hearing in the northwest region, one in the northeast region, one in the southeast region, one in the southwest region, and one in the central region. The commission shall provide at least fourteen days’ notice of the initial regional hearings.

(2) After release of draft redistricting plans, but not later than August 25, 2025, and not later than June 15 of every year ending in one, the commission shall hold at least five hearings across the five regions of Ohio to gather comments on the draft plans. The commission shall provide at least fourteen days’ notice of the regional draft redistricting plan hearings.

(3) In the event that the commission makes subsequent revisions to a draft redistricting plan, the commission shall hold at least two hearings to gather comments on any such plans. The commission shall provide at least three days’ notice of the revised redistricting plan hearings.

(4) No later than September 19, 2025, and no later than July 15 of every year ending in one, the commission shall adopt final redistricting plans. Proposed final redistricting plans shall be made public no later than three days prior to a meeting to adopt final redistricting plans.

(C) The commission shall make census and relevant election data, demographic data, and other public records broadly accessible and provide a portal for digital submission of public comments. All redistricting plans, whether draft or final, shall be produced with digital geographic files in a format that allows for analysis and reproduction of demographic data, and an analysis of district performance.

(D) Within three days of approval of any final redistricting plan, the commission shall issue and make publicly available a report for such redistricting plan that explains the basis on which the commission made decisions and sets forth how the commission used the public comments and the evidence presented to it to achieve compliance with the requirements for drawing districts. The report shall include relevant definitions of terms and standards used for drawing each such plan. In conjunction with the report, the commission shall also release the complete record before the commission.

(E) If any final redistricting plan adopted by the commission is not challenged under section 8 of this article, the commission shall submit that final redistricting plan to the Secretary of State for certification ten days after the redistricting plan report in section 5(D) of this article is made publicly available. The Secretary of State shall certify each final redistricting plan within one day of receiving the plan.

Section 6. Rules for drawing districts

(A) Each redistricting plan shall contain single-member districts that are geographically contiguous and that comply with the United States Constitution and all applicable federal laws, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

(B) To ban partisan gerrymandering and prohibit the use of redistricting plans that favor one political party and disfavor others, the statewide proportion of districts in each redistricting plan that favors each political party shall correspond closely to the statewide partisan preferences of the voters of Ohio.

(1) For purposes of this section, the statewide proportion of districts in each redistricting plan that favors each political party shall be determined by:

(a) Calculating the number of districts in the redistricting plan that would have been won by the candidates representing the First Major Party and the Second Major Party using the two-party vote in each statewide partisan general election contest held in the preceding six years for which precinct-level data is available;

(b) Dividing each of these numbers by the total number of districts in the redistricting plan to obtain the proportion of districts in the redistricting plan that would have been won by candidates representing the First Major Party and the Second Major Party in each election contest; and

(c) Calculating the median of these proportions for each political party.

(2) The statewide partisan preferences of the voters of Ohio shall be determined by:

(a) Calculating the proportion of the statewide two-party vote received by the candidates representing the First Major Party and the Second Major Party in each statewide partisan general election contest held in the preceding six years for which precinct-level data is available; and

(b) Calculating the median of these proportions for each political party.

(3) For the purposes of this section, to correspond closely means that the statewide proportion of districts in each redistricting plan that favors each political party may deviate by no more than three percentage points in either direction, or if this is arithmetically impossible, by the smallest possible proportion that is larger than three percentage points, from the statewide partisan preferences of the voters of Ohio.

(4) No redistricting plan shall be drawn with consideration of the place of residence of any incumbent elected official or any candidate for state or congressional office.

(5) In deciding whether to adopt a particular redistricting plan for the general assembly, the commission shall not take into account senators whose terms will not expire within two years of the plan’s effective date would be affected by following the provisions of Section 6(E).

(C) Each redistricting plan shall also comply, to the extent possible, with the criteria listed below in order of priority; provided, however, that application of the criteria below does not permit adoption of a redistricting plan that violates paragraphs (A) or (B) of this section:

(1) Districts for the same office shall be reasonably equal in total population;

(a) The total population of Ohio as determined by the most recent federal decennial census shall serve as the population basis for equalizing district population.

(b) Persons in the custody of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections or its successor agency shall be counted at their last known pre-incarceration address for purposes of equalizing district population.

(2) Districts shall ensure the equal functional ability of politically cohesive and geographically proximate racial, ethnic, and language minorities to participate in the political process and to elect candidates of choice; and

(3) Districts shall preserve communities of interest to the extent practicable.

(a) A community of interest is an area where the record before the commission demonstrates the existence of communities of people with broadly shared interests and representational needs, including, without limitation, interests and representational needs that arise from common ethnic, racial, social, cultural, geographic, environmental, socioeconomic, or historic identities or concerns.

(b) Counties, municipal corporations, townships, and school districts may constitute communities of interest provided the record before the commission clearly and convincingly demonstrates such subdivision is a community of people who have broadly shared interests and representational needs that are greater than those of other overlapping communities of interest.

(c) Under no circumstance shall communities of interest include a community defined based on a shared political identity or common relationships with political parties or political candidates.

(d) In considering which overlapping communities of interest to preserve, the commission shall give greater consideration to those communities of interest whose representational needs would be most benefited from the community’s inclusion in a single district.

(D) In the redistricting plan for the general assembly, districts for the Ohio House of Representatives shall be numbered from one to ninety-nine, and districts for the Ohio Senate shall be composed of three contiguous House of Representatives districts and shall be numbered from one to thirty-three.

(E) At any time the boundaries of Ohio Senate districts are changed in any general assembly final redistricting plan adopted pursuant to this article, a senator whose term will not expire within two years of the time the adopted redistricting plan becomes effective shall represent, for the remainder of the term for which the senator was elected, the Senate district that contains the largest portion of the population of the district from which the senator was elected, and the district shall be given the number of the district from which the senator was elected. If more than one senator whose term will not so expire would represent the same district by following the provisions of this section, the commission in the report required under section 5(D) of this article or the Supreme Court of Ohio adopting a final redistricting plan under section 8(D)(3) or (4) of this article shall designate which senator shall represent the district and shall designate which district the other senator or senators shall represent for the balance of their term or terms.

Section 7. Impasse procedure

(A) If the commission fails to adopt any final redistricting plan under section 5 of this article by September 19, 2025, or by July 15 of every year ending in one, the following procedures shall be followed to resolve the impasse:

(1) Each commissioner shall have three days to submit no more than one proposed redistricting plan for each redistricting plan that is the subject of impasse for a ranked-choice selection process. Any redistricting plan submitted for the ranked-choice selection process shall comply with the criteria in section 6 of this article and shall be made publicly available for comment for seven days.

(2) Within two days of the end of the public comment period, each commissioner shall then rank all the submitted redistricting plans starting with his or her most preferred redistricting plan followed by submitted redistricting plans ranked in decreasing order of preference. The submitted redistricting plan that wins a total vote runoff shall be the final redistricting plan. A total vote runoff process shall be conducted as follows:

(a) If a majority of commissioners rank the same submitted redistricting plan in the first position, that submitted redistricting plan is adopted.

(b) If no submitted redistricting plan garners a majority of first-position rankings, each submitted redistricting plan is allocated the number of points corresponding to the commissioners’ rankings. The method of allocating points for each submitted redistricting plan is to allocate one point for every commissioner’s first-rank vote, and two points for every commissioner’s second-rank vote, with this process continuing until all commissioners’ votes are allocated for each submitted redistricting plan.

Each submitted redistricting plan’s points total is the sum of the points from all commissioners, and the submitted redistricting plan with the highest point total is eliminated. The rankings of the other submitted redistricting plans are then adjusted if necessary to reflect that elimination and any changes in the point total. If there is a tie for the highest point total, the submitted redistricting plan to be eliminated shall be chosen through a random process.

(c) This process of eliminating the submitted redistricting plan with the highest point total is repeated until a redistricting plan has the majority of first-position rankings at which point it becomes the adopted final redistricting plan.

(B) With respect to any final redistricting plan adopted under the provisions of this section, the commission shall issue a report consistent with section 5(D) of this article and shall submit that final redistricting plan to the Secretary of State for certification consistent with section 5(E) of this article, and the Secretary of State shall certify that final redistricting plan consistent with section 5(E) of this article.

Section 8. Jurisdiction of Supreme Court; expedited judicial review; effect of determination of constitutionality.

(A)The Supreme Court of Ohio shall have exclusive, original jurisdiction in all cases which contend that a redistricting plan adopted by the commission fails to comply with the requirements of section 6(B) of this article.

(B) Any registered elector in Ohio may seek review of an adopted redistricting plan under this section by filing a petition within ten days of the commission’s issuance of the report required under section 5(D) of this article. If more than one such petition is filed, the Supreme Court of Ohio shall consolidate such petitions into a single action for purposes of adjudication. In any action brought under this section, the record before the court shall be limited to the record before the commission.

(C) The commission shall have exclusive standing to defend any action brought under this section and shall file a response to any petition within five days of the petition’s filing.

(D) Actions brought under this section shall be adjudicated using the following expedited review process:

(1) Within five days of the filing of any petition under this section, the Supreme Court of Ohio shall by unanimous vote select two special masters from the pool established by the bipartisan screening panel under section 2(E) of this article. If the court is unable to unanimously select two special masters, the administrative director of the Supreme Court of Ohio shall randomly select two special masters from the pool created by the bipartisan screening panel. The two special masters selected shall be entitled to reasonable compensation set by the Supreme Court of Ohio commensurate with their skills, experience, and expertise and consistent with industry standards, plus reimbursement of reasonable, actual, and necessary expenses. The special masters shall hold a public hearing within twenty days of the filing of the commission’s response to the latest filed petition. No later than seven days after conclusion of the hearing, applying a standard of review deferential to the decisions of the commission, the special masters shall review the challenged redistricting plan, considering only the record before the court, to determine whether it complies with section 6(B) of this article and shall issue a report setting forth their determination of whether the commission abused its discretion in concluding that the challenged redistricting plan complies with the requirements of section 6(B) of this article.

(2) If a petitioner or the commission disagrees with the report and determination issued by the special masters, such party shall have seven days to file objections with the Supreme Court of Ohio.

(a) If no objection to the special masters’ report and determination is timely filed, the Supreme Court of Ohio shall issue an order adopting the special masters’ report and determination as the final, non-reviewable decision of the court.

(b) If any such objections are filed, the Supreme Court of Ohio shall hold a public hearing on the objections within fifteen days of the filing of the latest filed objection. Applying the same standard of review deferential to the decisions of the commission, based on the record before the court, the Supreme Court of Ohio shall issue a written order, with opinion, within ten calendar days after the hearing, addressing and either upholding or rejecting each objection to the special masters’ determination as to whether or not the commission abused its discretion in concluding that the challenged redistricting plan complies with section 6(B) of this article.

(3) If a final order of the Supreme Court of Ohio issued under paragraph (D)(2) of this section determines that the commission abused its discretion in concluding that a challenged redistricting plan fails to comply with the requirements of section 6(B) of this article, the commission shall have seven days to make any adjustments necessary to bring the redistricting plan into compliance and submit the revised redistricting plan to the special masters and the Supreme Court of Ohio. If the commission makes the necessary adjustments, the Supreme Court shall issue an order adopting the revised redistricting plan as the final, nonreviewable decision of the court.

(4) If the commission fails to make the necessary adjustments within seven days or the court, in consultation with the special masters, concludes that the commission has failed to adequately remedy the violation of section 6(B) of this article, the Supreme Court of Ohio shall immediately order the special masters to make such minimal adjustments within five days as are necessary to bring the challenged redistricting plan into compliance. Changes made to a challenged redistricting plan by the special masters shall not be reviewable by any court, and the Supreme Court of Ohio shall issue a final order adopting the redistricting plan as adjusted by the special masters.

(E) Within one day of the issuance of a final order approving a redistricting plan by the Supreme Court of Ohio in a case brought under this section, the commission shall submit such plan to the Secretary of State, who shall certify any such redistricting plan within one day of receipt.

(F) Except for claims brought under this section, no other challenges to an adopted final redistricting plan, including challenges to the decisions of the commission with respect to how best to comply with the criteria in section 6(C), may be brought in any court.

Section 9. Financial and administrative independence

(A) Commissioners shall be entitled to one-hundred and twenty-five dollars per day, plus reimbursement for reasonable expenses at the rate set by the United States Internal Revenue Service, for each day attending commission meetings or otherwise carrying out the responsibilities of the commission. This amount shall be adjusted for inflation annually beginning in 2025.

(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of this constitution or any laws of this state, the general assembly shall make appropriations to the Department of Administrative Services, the bipartisan screening panel, and the commission in amounts adequate for each entity to fulfill its duty under this article, and the general assembly shall further appropriate amounts adequate for funding those entities’ participation, if necessary, in all related litigation. If the general assembly fails to comply with any of its obligations under this paragraph, the Supreme Court of Ohio shall compel it to comply with such obligations forthwith.

(1) For purposes of funding the commission, adequate funding shall mean:

(a) For redistricting in 2025, an amount appropriated by the general assembly no later than December 10, 2024, that is not less than seven million dollars.

(b) For each redistricting cycle after 2025, an amount appropriated no later than January 1 of a year ending in zero that is not less than the amount appropriated under sub-paragraph (B)(1)(a) of this section, adjusted for inflation.

(c) The general assembly shall make separate and timely appropriations to cover all the commission’s expenses in any related litigation.

(2) For purposes of funding the bipartisan screening panel, adequate funding shall mean an amount appropriated no later than December 10, 2024, and January 1 of every subsequent year ending in zero, that is not less than one-eighth of the amount appropriated under sub-paragraph (B)(1)(a) of this section, adjusted for inflation. The general assembly shall make separate, timely, and adequate appropriations to cover all the bipartisan screening panel’s expenses in any related litigation.

(C) The work and compensation of the special masters under this article shall be timely and adequately funded out of the budget of the Supreme Court of Ohio.

Section 10. Implementation

(A) Upon the effective date of this article, all redistricting plans used to elect members of the general assembly or the United States House of Representatives are void for any subsequent election.

(B) In order to facilitate compliance with section 6 of this article, the Secretary of State shall, within 90 days after any election, collect the precinct boundaries used by each county for any statewide election held, and shall maintain such data and shall make it publicly available on an ongoing basis in a manner suitable for analysis of the redistricting plans.

(C) The redistricting process set forth in this article shall take place once in a redistricting cycle.

Section 11. Definitions

(A) “Effective date of this article” means the date on which the Secretary of State certifies that voters have approved the addition of this article to the Ohio constitution.

(B) “Independent” means a person who is not affiliated with either the First Major Party or the Second Major Party as determined by the bipartisan screening panel based on available information.

(C) “First Major Party” means the political party whose candidate for governor received the highest number of votes in the last election held for such office.

(D)“Second Major Party” means the political party whose candidate for governor received the second highest number of votes in the last election held for such office.

(E) “Retired judge” means a person who left judicial service on any Ohio court by reason of resignation or retirement. “Retired judge” does not include a person who was removed or suspended without reinstatement from service on any Ohio court pursuant to the Rules for the Government of the Judiciary or who resigned or retired from service on any Ohio court while a complaint was pending against the person under those rules. A retired judge may at the time of his or her selection be serving, and may thereafter continue serving, as an assigned judge, teacher, mediator, or arbitrator so long as that service does not conflict with the duties of the bipartisan screening panel.

(F) “Special master” means a person with the demonstrated ability, knowledge, experience, and expertise to analyze, create, and, where warranted, modify redistricting plans in accordance with constitutional requirements, as well as the capacity to evaluate evidence relevant to such plans and such requirements and to generate a thorough, credible report and determination regarding the same that will withstand judicial review and engender public confidence. This may include a person with appropriate demographic analysis abilities, experience with mapping populations at a state level, and legal understanding of compliance requirements.

(G) “Adjusted for inflation” means annually applying the United States City Average Consumer Price Index for urban consumers in the Midwest Region, East North Central Division, or the future equivalent of such index.

(H) “Department of Administrative Services” means that department or its successor agency.

(I) “Redistricting cycle” means the redrawing in 2024-2025 and following each subsequent federal decennial census, in accordance with this article, of the boundaries of the districts used to elect members of the general assembly and the United States House of Representatives.

Section 12. Construction and severability

(A) The provisions of this article are severable. If any provision of this article or its application is held to be invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications, which shall be given maximum possible effect in the absence of the invalid provision or application.

(B) If any provision of this article conflicts with other provisions of this constitution, conflicts shall be resolved in favor of this article.

(C) All references to days in this article shall be understood as calendar days. If any deadline or date in this article falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or official state holiday, the date or deadline shall be extended to the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or official state holiday.

(D) The commission may make reasonable adjustments to its deadlines in this article if conditions beyond its control require such adjustment to allow adoption of redistricting plans.

Articles XI

Section 1

(A) The Ohio redistricting commission shall be responsible for the redistricting of this state for the general assembly. The commission shall consist of the following seven members:

(1) The governor;

(2) The auditor of state;

(3) The secretary of state;

(4) One person appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives;

(5) One person appointed by the legislative leader of the largest political party in the house of representatives of which the speaker of the house of representatives is not a member;

(6) One person appointed by the president of the senate; and

(7) One person appointed by the legislative leader of the largest political party in the senate of which the president of the senate is not a member.

No appointed member of the commission shall be a current member of congress.

The legislative leaders in the senate and the house of representatives of each of the two largest political parties represented in the general assembly, acting jointly by political party. shall appoint a member of the commission to serve as a co-chairperson of the commission.

(B)(1) Unless otherwise specified in this article or in Article XIX of this constitution, a simple majority of the commission members shall be required for any action by the commission.

(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in division (B)(2)(b) of this section, a majority vote of the members of the commission including at least one member of the commission who is a member of each of the two largest political parties represented in the general assembly, shall be required to do any of the following:

(i) Adopt rules of the commission;

(ii) Hire staff for the commission;

(iii) Expend funds.

(b) If the commission is unable to agree, by the vote required under division (B)(2)(a) of this section. on the manner in which funds should be expended, each co-chairperson of the commission shall have the authority to expend one-half of the funds that have been appropriated to the commission.

(3) The affirmative vote of four members of the commission, including at least two members of the commission who represent each of the two largest political parties represented in the general assembly shall be required to adopt any general assembly district plan. For the purposes of this division and of Section 1 of Article XIX of this constitution, a member of the commission shall be considered to represent a political party if the member was appointed to the commission by a member of that political party or if, in the case of the governor, the auditor of state, or the secretary of state, the member is a member of that political party.

(C) At the first meeting of the commission, which the governor shall convene only in a year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Sections 8 and 9 of this article and in Sections 1 and 3 of Article XIX of this constitution, the commission shall set a schedule for the adoption of procedural rules for the operation of the commission.

The commission shall release to the public a proposed general assembly district plan for the boundaries for each of the ninety-nine house of representatives districts and the thirty-three senate districts. The commission shall draft the proposed plan in the manner prescribed in this article. Before adopting, but after introducing, a proposed plan, the commission shall conduct a minimum of three public hearings across the state to present the proposed plan and shall seek public input regarding the proposed plan. All meetings of the commission shall be open to the public. Meetings shall be broadcast by electronic means of transmission using a medium readily accessible by the general public.

The commission shall adopt a final general assembly district plan not later than the first day of September of a year ending in the numeral one. After the commission adopts a final plan, the commission shall promptly file the plan with the secretary of state. Upon filing with the secretary of state, the plan shall become effective.

Four weeks after the adoption of a general assembly district plan or a congressional district plan, whichever is later, the commission shall be automatically dissolved.

(D) The general assembly shall be responsible for making the appropriations it determines necessary in order for the commission to perform its duties under this article and Article XIX of this constitution.

Section 2

Each house of representatives district shall be entitled to a single representative in each general assembly. Each senate district shall be entitled to a single senator in each general assembly.

Section 3

(A) The whole population of the state, as determined by the federal decennial census or, if such is unavailable, such other basis as the general assembly may direct, shall be divided by the number "ninety-nine" and by the number "thirty-three" and the quotients shall be the ratio of representation in the house of representatives and in the senate, respectively, for ten years next succeeding such redistricting.

(B) A general assembly district plan shall comply with all of the requirements of division (B) of this section.

(1) The population of each house of representatives district shall be substantially equal to the ratio of representation in the house of representatives, and the population of each senate district shall be substantially equal to the ratio of representation in the senate, as provided in division (A) of this section. In no event shall any district contain a population of less than ninety-five per cent nor more than one hundred five per cent of the applicable ratio of representation.

(2) Any general assembly district plan adopted by the commission shall comply with all applicable provisions of the constitutions of Ohio and the United States and of federal law.

(3) Every general assembly district shall be composed of contiguous territory, and the boundary of each district shall be a single nonintersecting continuous line.

(C) House of representatives districts shall be created and numbered in the following order of priority. to the extent that such order is consistent with the foregoing standards:

(1) Proceeding in succession from the largest to the smallest, each county containing population greater than one hundred five per cent of the ratio of representation in the house of representatives shall be divided into as many house of representatives districts as it has whole ratios of representation. Any fraction of the population in excess of a whole ratio shall be a part of only one adjoining house of representatives district.

(2) Each county containing population of not less than ninety-five per cent of the ratio of representation in the house of representatives nor more than one hundred five per cent of the ratio shall be designated a representative district.

(3) The remaining territory of the state shall be divided into representative districts by combining the areas of counties, municipal corporations, and townships. Where feasible, no county shall be split more than once.

(D)(1)(a) Except as otherwise provided in divisions (D)(l)(b) and (c) of this section, a county, municipal corporation, or township is considered to be split if any contiguous portion of its territory is not contained entirely within one district.

(b) If a municipal corporation or township has territory in more than one county, the contiguous portion of that municipal corporation or township that lies in each county shall be considered to be a separate municipal corporation or township for the purposes of this section.

(c) If a municipal corporation or township that is located in a county that contains a municipal corporation or township that has a population of more than one ratio of representation is split for the purpose of complying with division (E)(l)(a) or (b) of this section, each portion of that municipal corporation or township shall be considered to be a separate municipal corporation or township for the purposes of this section.

(2) Representative districts shall be drawn so as to split the smallest possible number of municipal corporations and townships whose contiguous portions contain a population of more than fifty per cent. but less than one hundred per cent, of one ratio of representation.

(3) Where the requirements of divisions (B), (C), and (D) of this section cannot feasibly be attained by forming a representative district from whole municipal corporations and townships, not more than one municipal corporation or township may be split per representative district.

(E)(1) If it is not possible for the commission to comply with all of the requirements of divisions (B), (C), and (D) of this section in drawing a particular representative district, the commission shall take the first action listed below that makes it possible for the commission to draw that district:

(a) Notwithstanding division (D)(3) of this section, the commission shall create the district by splitting two municipal corporations or townships whose contiguous portions do not contain a population of more than fifty per cent, but less than one hundred per cent, of one ratio of representation.

(b) Notwithstanding division (D)(2) of this section, the commission shall create the district by splitting a municipal corporation or township whose contiguous portions contain a population of more than fifty per cent, but less than one hundred per cent, of one ratio of representation.

(c) Notwithstanding division (C)(2) of this section, the commission shall create the district by splitting, once, a single county that contains a population of not less than ninety-five per cent of the ratio of representation, but not more than one hundred five per cent of the ratio of representation.

(d) Notwithstanding division (C)(l) of this section, the commission shall create the district by including in two districts portions of the territory that remains after a county that contains a population of more than one hundred five per cent of the ratio of representation has been divided into as many house of representatives districts as it has whole ratios of representation.

(2) If the commission takes an action under division (E)(1) of this section, the commission shall include in the general assembly district plan a statement explaining which action the commission took under that division and the reason the commission took that action.

(3) If the commission complies with divisions (E)(1) and (2) of this section in drawing a district, the commission shall not be considered to have violated division (C)(l), (C)(2), (D)(2), or (D)(3) of this section, as applicable, in drawing that district. for the purpose of an analysis under division (D) of Section 9 of this article.

Section 4

(A) Senate districts shall be composed of three contiguous house of representatives districts.

(B)(1) A county having at least one whole senate ratio of representation shall have as many senate districts wholly within the boundaries of the county as it has whole senate ratios of representation. Any fraction of the population in excess of a whole ratio shall be a part of only one adjoining senate district.

(2) Counties having less than one senate ratio of representation, but at least one house of representatives ratio of representation, shall be part of only one senate district.

(3) If it is not possible for the commission to draw representative districts that comply with all of the requirements of this article and that make it possible for the commission to comply with all of the requirements of divisions (B)(1) and (2) of this section, the commission shall draw senate districts so as to commit the fewest possible violations of those divisions. If the commission complies with this division in drawing senate districts, the commission shall not be considered to have violated division (B)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable, in drawing those districts, for the purpose of an analysis under division (D) of Section 9 of this article.

(C) The number of whole ratios of representation for a county shall be determined by dividing the population of the county by the ratio of representation in the senate determined under division (A) of Section 3 of this article.

(D) Senate districts shall be numbered from one through thirty-three and as provided in Section 5 of this article.

Section 5

At any time the boundaries of senate districts are changed in any general assembly district plan made pursuant to any provision of this article, a senator whose term will not expire within two years of the time the plan becomes effective shall represent, for the remainder of the term for which the senator was elected. the senate district that contains the largest portion of the population of the district from which the senator was elected, and the district shall be given the number of the district from which the senator was elected. If more than one senator whose term will not so expire would represent the same district by following the provisions of this section, the plan shall designate which senator shall represent the district and shall designate which district the other senator or senators shall represent for the balance of their term or terms.

Section 6

The Ohio redistricting commission shall attempt to draw a general assembly district plan that meets all of the following standards:

(A) No general assembly district plan shall be drawn primarily to favor or disfavor a political party.

(B) The statewide proportion of districts whose voters, based on statewide state and federal partisan general election results during the last ten years, favor each political party shall correspond closely to the statewide preferences of the voters of Ohio.

(C) General assembly districts shall be compact. Nothing in this section permits the commission to violate the district standards described in Section 2, 3, 4, 5, or 7 of this article.

Section 7

Notwithstanding the fact that boundaries of counties, municipal corporations, and townships within a district may be changed, district boundaries shall be created by using the boundaries of counties, municipal corporations. and townships as they exist at the time of the federal decennial census on which the redistricting is based, or, if unavailable, on such other basis as the general assembly has directed.

Section 8

(A)(1) If the Ohio redistricting commission fails to adopt a final general assembly district plan not later than the first day of September of a year ending in the numeral one. in accordance with Section 1 of this article, the commission shall introduce a proposed general assembly district plan by a simple majority vote of the commission.

(2) After introducing a proposed general assembly district plan under division (A)(1) of this section, the commission shall hold a public hearing concerning the proposed plan, at which the public may offer testimony and at which the commission may adopt amendments to the proposed plan. Members of the commission should attend the hearing; however, only a quorum of the members of the commission is required to conduct the hearing.

(3) After the hearing described in division (A)(2) of this section is held, and not later than the fifteenth day of September of a year ending in the numeral one, the commission shall adopt a final general assembly district plan, either by the vote required to adopt a plan under division (B)(3) of Section 1 of this article or by a simple majority vote of the commission.

(B) If the commission adopts a final general assembly district plan in accordance with division (A)(3) of this section by the vote required to adopt a plan under division (B)(3) of Section 1 of this article, the plan shall take effect upon filing with the secretary of state and shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 9 of this article.

(C)(1)(a) Except as otherwise provided in division (C)(1)(b) of this section, if the commission adopts a final general assembly district plan in accordance with division (A)(3) of this section by a simple majority vote of the commission, and not by the vote required to adopt a plan under division (B)(3) of Section 1 of this article, the plan shall take effect upon filing with the secretary of state and shall remain effective until two general elections for the house of representatives have occurred under the plan.

(b) If the commission adopts a final general assembly district plan in accordance with division (A)(3) of this section by a simple majority vote of the commission, and not by the vote required to adopt a plan under division (B) of Section 1 of this article, and that plan is adopted to replace a plan that ceased to be effective under division (C)(l)(a) of this section before a year ending in the numeral one, the plan adopted under this division shall take effect upon filing with the secretary of state and shall remain effective until a year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 9 of this article.

(2) A final general assembly district plan adopted under division (C)(1)(a) or (b) of this section shall include a statement explaining what the commission determined to be the statewide preferences of the voters of Ohio and the manner in which the statewide proportion of districts in the plan whose voters, based on statewide state and federal partisan general election results during the last ten years, favor each political party corresponds closely to those preferences, as described in division (B) of Section 6 of this article. At the time the plan is adopted, a member of the commission who does not vote in favor of the plan may submit a declaration of the member's opinion concerning the statement included with the plan.

(D) After a general assembly district plan adopted under division (C)(1)(a) of this section ceases to be effective, and not earlier than the first day of July of the year following the year in which the plan ceased to be effective, the commission shall be reconstituted as provided in Section 1 of this article, convene. and adopt a new general assembly district plan in accordance with this article, to be used until the next time for redistricting under this article. The commission shall draw the new general assembly district plan using the same population and county, municipal corporation, and township boundary data as were used to draw the previous plan adopted under division (C) of this section.

Section 9

(A) The supreme court of Ohio shall have exclusive, original jurisdiction in all cases arising under this article.

(B) In the event that any section of this constitution relating to redistricting, any general assembly district plan made by the Ohio redistricting commission, or any district is determined to be invalid by an unappealed final order of a court of competent jurisdiction then, notwithstanding any other provisions of this constitution, the commission shall be reconstituted as provided in Section 1 of this article, convene, and ascertain and determine a general assembly district plan in conformity with such provisions of this constitution as are then valid, including establishing terms of office and election of members of the general assembly from districts designated in the plan, to be used until the next time for redistricting under this article in conformity with such provisions of this constitution as are then valid.

(C) Notwithstanding any provision of this constitution or any law regarding the residence of senators and representatives, a general assembly district plan made pursuant to this section shall allow thirty days for persons to change residence in order to be eligible for election.

(D)(1) No court shall order, in any circumstance, the implementation or enforcement of any general assembly district plan that has not been approved by the commission in the manner prescribed by this article.

(2) No court shall order the commission to adopt a particular general assembly district plan or to draw a particular district.

(3) If the supreme court of Ohio determines that a general assembly district plan adopted by the commission does not comply with the requirements of Section 2, 3, 4, 5, or 7 of this article, the available remedies shall be as follows:

(a) If the court finds that the plan contains one or more isolated violations of those requirements. the court shall order the commission to amend the plan to correct the violation.

(b) If the court finds that it is necessary to amend not fewer than six house of representatives districts to correct violations of those requirements, to amend not fewer than two senate districts to correct violations of those requirements. or both, the court shall declare the plan invalid and shall order the commission to adopt a new general assembly district plan in accordance with this article.

(c) If, in considering a plan adopted under division (C) of Section 8 of this article, the court determines that both of the following are true, the court shall order the commission to adopt a new general assembly district plan in accordance with this article:

(i) The plan significantly violates those requirements in a manner that materially affects the ability of the plan to contain districts whose voters favor political parties in an overall proportion that corresponds closely to the statewide political party preferences of the voters of Ohio, as described in division (B) of Section 6 of this article.

(ii) The statewide proportion of districts in the plan whose voters, based on statewide state and federal partisan general election results during the last ten years, favor each political party does not correspond closely to the statewide preferences of the voters of Ohio.

Section 10

The various provisions of this article are intended to be severable, and the invalidity of one or more of such provisions shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.

Article XIX

Section 1

(A) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the general assembly shall be responsible for the redistricting of this state for congress based on the prescribed number of congressional districts apportioned to the state pursuant to Section 2 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States.

Not later than the last day of September of a year ending in the numeral one, the general assembly shall pass a congressional district plan in the form of a bill by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the members of each house of the general assembly, including the affirmative vote of at least one-half of the members of each of the two largest political parties represented in that house. A congressional district plan that is passed under this division and becomes law shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

(B) If a congressional district plan is not passed not later than the last day of September of a year ending in the numeral one and filed with the secretary of state in accordance with Section 16 of Article II of this constitution, then the Ohio redistricting commission described in Article XI of this constitution shall adopt a congressional district plan not later than the last day of October of that year by the affirmative vote of four members of the commission, including at least two members of the commission who represent each of the two largest political parties represented in the general assembly. The plan shall take effect upon filing with the secretary of state and shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

(C) (1) If the Ohio redistricting commission does not adopt a plan not later than the last day of October of a year ending in the numeral one, then the general assembly shall pass a congressional district plan in the form of a bill not later than the last day of November of that year.

(2) If the general assembly passes a congressional district plan under division (C)(1) of this section by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the members of each house of the general assembly, including the affirmative vote of at least one-third of the members of each of the two largest political parties represented in that house, and the plan becomes law, the plan shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

(3) If the general assembly passes a congressional district plan under division (C)(1) of this section by a simple majority of the members of each house of the general assembly, and not by the vote described in division (C)(2) of this section, all of the following shall apply:

(a) The general assembly shall not pass a plan that unduly favors or disfavors a political party or its incumbents.

(b) The general assembly shall not unduly split governmental units, giving preference to keeping whole, in the order named, counties, then townships and municipal corporations.

(c) Division (B)(2) of Section 2 of this article shall not apply to the plan. The general assembly shall attempt to draw districts that are compact.

(d) The general assembly shall include in the plan an explanation of the plan's compliance with divisions (C)(3)(a) to (c) of this section.

(e) If the plan becomes law, the plan shall remain effective until two general elections for the United States house of representatives have occurred under the plan, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

(D) Not later than the last day of September of the year after the year in which a plan expires under division (C)(3)(e) of this section, the general assembly shall pass a congressional district plan in the form of a bill by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the members of each house of the general assembly, including the affirmative vote of at least one-half of the members of each of the two largest political parties represented in that house. A congressional district plan that is passed under this division and becomes law shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

(E) If a congressional district plan is not passed not later than the last day of September of the year after the year in which a plan expires under division (C)(3)(e) of this section and filed with the secretary of state in accordance with Section 16 of Article II of this constitution, then the Ohio redistricting commission described in Article XI of this constitution shall be reconstituted and reconvene and shall adopt a congressional district plan not later than the last day of October of that year by the affirmative vote of four members of the commission, including at least two members of the commission who represent each of the two largest political parties represented in the general assembly. A congressional district plan adopted under this division shall take effect upon filing with the secretary of state and shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

A congressional district plan passed under this division shall be drawn using the federal decennial census data or other data on which the previous redistricting was based.

(F) (1) If the Ohio redistricting commission does not adopt a congressional district plan not later than the last day of October of the year after the year in which a plan expires under division (C)(3)(e) of this section, then the general assembly shall pass a congressional district plan in the form of a bill not later than the last day of November of that year.

A congressional district plan adopted under this division shall be drawn using the federal decennial census data or other data on which the previous redistricting was based.

(2) If the general assembly passes a congressional district plan under division (F)(1) of this section by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the members of each house, including the affirmative vote of at least one-third of the members of each of the two largest political parties represented in that house, and the plan becomes law, it shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

(3) If the general assembly passes a congressional district plan under division (F)(1) of this section by a simple majority vote of the members of each house of the general assembly, and not by the vote described in division (F)(2) of this section, all of the following shall apply:

(a) The general assembly shall not pass a plan that unduly favors or disfavors a political party or its incumbents.

(b) The general assembly shall not unduly split governmental units, giving preference to keeping whole, in the order named, counties, then townships and municipal corporations.

(c) Division (B)(2) of Section 2 of this article shall not apply to the plan. The general assembly shall attempt to draw districts that are compact.

(d) The general assembly shall include in the plan an explanation of the plan's compliance with divisions (F)(3)(a) to (c) of this section.

(e) If the plan becomes law, the plan shall remain effective until the next year ending in the numeral one, except as provided in Section 3 of this article.

(G) Before the general assembly passes a congressional district plan under any division of this section, a joint committee of the general assembly shall hold at least two public committee hearings concerning a proposed plan. Before the Ohio redistricting commission adopts a congressional district plan under any division of this section, the commission shall hold at least two public hearings concerning a proposed plan.

(H) The general assembly and the Ohio redistricting commission shall facilitate and allow for the submission of proposed congressional district plans by members of the public. The general assembly shall provide by law the manner in which members of the public may do so.

(I) For purposes of filing a congressional district plan with the governor or the secretary of state under this article, a congressional district plan shall include both a legal description of the boundaries of the congressional districts and all electronic data necessary to create a congressional district map for the purpose of holding congressional elections.

(J) When a congressional district plan ceases to be effective under this article, the district boundaries described in that plan shall continue in operation for the purpose of holding elections until a new congressional district plan takes effect in accordance with this article. If a vacancy occurs in a district that was created under the previous district plan, the election to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the unexpired term shall be held using the previous district plan.

Section 2

(A) (1) Each congressional district shall be entitled to a single representative in the United States house of representatives in each congress.

(2) The whole population of the state, as determined by the federal decennial census or, if the federal decennial census is unavailable, another basis as directed by the general assembly, shall be divided by the number of congressional districts apportioned to the state pursuant to Section 2 of Article I of the Constitution of the United States, and the quotient shall be the congressional ratio of representation for the next ten years.

(3) Notwithstanding the fact that boundaries of counties, municipal corporations, and townships within a district may be changed, district boundaries shall be created by using the data from the most recent federal decennial census or from the basis directed by the general assembly, as applicable.

(B) A congressional district plan shall comply with all of the following requirements:

(1) The plan shall comply with all applicable provisions of the constitutions of Ohio and the United States and of federal law, including federal laws protecting racial minority voting rights.

(2) Every congressional district shall be compact.

(3) Every congressional district shall be composed of contiguous territory, and the boundary of each district shall be a single nonintersecting continuous line.

(4) Except as otherwise required by federal law, in a county that contains a population that exceeds the congressional ratio of representation, the authority drawing the districts shall take the first of the following actions that applies to that county:

(a) If a municipal corporation or township located in that county contains a population that exceeds the congressional ratio of representation, the authority shall attempt to include a significant portion of that municipal corporation or township in a single district and may include in that district other municipal corporations or townships that are located in that county and whose residents have similar interests as the residents of the municipal corporation or township that contains a population that exceeds the congressional ratio of representation. In determining whether the population of a municipal corporation or township exceeds the congressional ratio of representation for the purpose of this division, if the territory of that municipal corporation or township completely surrounds the territory of another municipal corporation or township, the territory of the surrounded municipal corporation or township shall be considered part of the territory of the surrounding municipal corporation or township.

(b) If one municipal corporation or township in that county contains a population of not less than one hundred thousand and not more than the congressional ratio of representation, that municipal corporation or township shall not be split. If that county contains two or more such municipal corporations or townships, only the most populous of those municipal corporations or townships shall not be split.

(5) Of the eighty-eight counties in this state, sixty-five counties shall be contained entirely within a district, eighteen counties may be split not more than once, and five counties may be split not more than twice. The authority drawing the districts may determine which counties may be split.

(6) If a congressional district includes only part of the territory of a particular county, the part of that congressional district that lies in that particular county shall be contiguous within the boundaries of the county.

(7) No two congressional districts shall share portions of the territory of more than one county, except for a county whose population exceeds four hundred thousand.

(8) The authority drawing the districts shall attempt to include at least one whole county in each congressional district. This division does not apply to a congressional district that is contained entirely within one county or that cannot be drawn in that manner while complying with federal law.

(C) (1) Except as otherwise provided in division (C)(2) of this section, for purposes of this article, a county, municipal corporation, or township is considered to be split if, based on the census data used for the purpose of redistricting, any contiguous portion of its territory is not contained entirely within one district.

(2) If a municipal corporation or township has territory in more than one county, the contiguous portion of that municipal corporation or township that lies in each county shall be considered to be a separate municipal corporation or township for purposes of this section.

Section 3

(A) The supreme court of Ohio shall have exclusive, original jurisdiction in all cases arising under this article.

(B) (1) In the event that any section of this constitution relating to congressional redistricting, any congressional district plan, or any congressional district or group of congressional districts is challenged and is determined to be invalid by an unappealed final order of a court of competent jurisdiction then, notwithstanding any other provisions of this constitution, the general assembly shall pass a congressional district plan in accordance with the provisions of this constitution that are then valid, to be used until the next time for redistricting under this article in accordance with the provisions of this constitution that are then valid.

The general assembly shall pass that plan not later than the thirtieth day after the last day on which an appeal of the court order could have been filed or, if the order is not appealable, the thirtieth day after the day on which the order is issued.

A congressional district plan passed under this division shall remedy any legal defects in the previous plan identified by the court but shall include no changes to the previous plan other than those made in order to remedy those defects.

(2) If a new congressional district plan is not passed in accordance with division (B)(1) of this section and filed with the secretary of state in accordance with Section 16 of Article II of this constitution, the Ohio redistricting commission shall be reconstituted and reconvene and shall adopt a congressional district plan in accordance with the provisions of this constitution that are then valid, to be used until the next time for redistricting under this article in accordance with the provisions of this constitution that are then valid.

The commission shall adopt that plan not later than the thirtieth day after the deadline described in division (B)(1) of this section.

A congressional district plan adopted under this division shall remedy any legal defects in the previous plan identified by the court but shall include no other changes to the previous plan other than those made in order to remedy those defects.

Support

Citizens Not Politicians led the campaign in support of the ballot initiative. The campaign stated that the citizen-initiated constitutional amendment would "end gerrymandering by empowering citizens, not politicians, to draw fair districts using an open and transparent process."

Supporters

The campaign provided a list of endorsements, which is available here.

Officials

• U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D)
• Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D)
• State Sen. Hearcel Craig (D)
• State Sen. William DeMora (D)
• State Sen. Paula Hicks-Hudson (D)
• State Sen. Catherine Ingram (D)
• State Sen. Kent Smith (D)
• State Sen. Vernon Sykes (D)
• State Rep. Dani Isaacsohn (D)
• State Rep. Dontavius Jarrells (D)
• House Minority Leader Allison Russo (D)
• State Rep. Casey Weinstein (D)

Candidates

• Jerrad Christian (D) - Candidate for U.S. House

Former Officials

• State Rep. Mike Curtin (D)
• Ohio Supreme Court Justice Yvette McGee Brown (D)
• Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor (R)

Political Parties

• Democratic Party of Ohio
• Libertarian Party of Ohio
• Ohio Forward Party

Unions

• AFL-CIO
• American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
• American Federation of Teachers
• National Education Association
• Ohio AFL-CIO
• Ohio Association of Professional Firefighters
• Ohio Education Association
• Ohio Federation of Teachers
• SEIU Ohio State Joint Council
• United Auto Workers

Organizations

• A. Philip Randolph Institute
• ACLU of Ohio
• Abortion Forward
• All in for Ohio Kids
• America Votes
• American Civil Liberties Union
• Article IV
• Brennan Center For Justice
• Common Cause Ohio
• Democracy Fund
• Election Reformers Network
• Equality Ohio
• Global Impact Social Welfare Fund
• Green Advocacy Project
• Human Rights Campaign PAC
• Innovation Ohio
• Leadership Now Project
• League of Women Voters of Ohio
• Movement Voter Project
• Ohio Alliance for Retired Americans
• Ohio Citizen Action
• Ohio Coalition on Black Civic Participation
• Ohio Conference AAUP
• Ohio Environmental Council
• Ohio Farmers Union
• Ohio NAACP
• Ohio Organizing Collaborative
• Ohio Progressive Collaborative
• Ohio Student Association
• Ohio Sustainable Business Council
• Ohio Women’s Alliance
• Open Society Policy Center
• Our American Future Foundation
• Our Revolution
• Planned Parenthood Advocates of Ohio
• Represent.Us
• Sixteen Thirty Fund
• Stand Up America
• Tides Foundation
• Unite America
• Unite and Renew Fund, Inc.
• Vote Save America
• Voters for the American Center

Individuals

• Kent Thiry - Former CEO of DaVita

Arguments

• Former Ohio Supreme Court Justice Maureen O’Connor (R): "Seven times my colleagues on the Ohio Supreme Court and I issued bipartisan rulings finding the politician drawn maps were unconstitutional. Seven times the politicians thumbed their nose at the citizens and trampled on the rule of law and forced gerrymandered maps on our voters."
• Ohio House Minority Leader Allison Russo (D-7): "This is an extraordinary step in returning power to the people and putting citizens in charge of the redistricting process in Ohio. With fair districts, we can fund our schools properly, create good paying jobs, and stop pushing through divisive legislation that does nothing to help Ohio’s hardworking families get ahead."
• Brennan Center For Justice: "For decades, Ohio has been one of the most gerrymandered states in the country. Under current rules, politicians and lobbyists draw district maps behind closed doors with virtually no checks and balances. But if Ohio voters approve the Citizens Not Politicians Amendment this November, all that could change. The amendment would take the redistricting pen away from political insiders and give it to Ohio citizens instead. The new citizen-driven process would be open and transparent and produce fair maps that correspond to the preferences of Ohio voters."
• Richard A. Stoff, Senior Adviser to the Leadership Now Project: "The sad reality is that Ohio's congressional districts are graded a 'D' for partisan fairness by Princeton University’s Gerrymandering Project. This practice has led us down a precarious path. It creates a system where election outcomes are predetermined, eroding public trust in our institutions — a fact we understand deeply, as employers of thousands of Ohioans. When legislative bodies mirror the will of politicians rather than the people, it results in policies misaligned with the needs of real people. This not only hampers effective policymaking, but sends a cynical message to the public and, worse case scenario, repels top talent and their families from investing their future in our state."
• Former Rep. Mike Curtin (D-17): "Throughout Ohio history, the majority party in the state legislature has rigged elections by gerrymandering districts. Especially congressional districts. ... It’s beyond time Ohioans take charge and deliver a death blow to gerrymandering by adopting a truly independent process for drawing congressional and state legislative maps. ... Ohio history proves Statehouse politicians, no matter how much they promise, will never do it on their own."
• Tom Roberts, President of the Ohio State Conference of the NAACP: "We’ve seen and heard enough. Whenever someone states that the Citizen’s Not Politicians ballot initiative won’t work, consider whether they live in gerrymandered or hyper-partisan districts. Ohioans have given elected leaders multiple chances to draw fair maps. In recent years, they have failed every time. On seven occasions, the Ohio Supreme Court has said the current redistricting commission made of politicians drew unconstitutional, gerrymandered maps."
• Christina Collins, Executive Director of Honesty for Ohio Education: "(Competitive districts) could stop all of this culture war stuff that Ohioans don’t care about. It’s my hope that (changing the redistricting process) would help refocus the legislature away from this hate-filled and harmful legislation that does no good."
• Catherine Turcer, Executive Director of Common Cause Ohio: "The manipulation of district lines is a manipulation of elections, and the manipulation of elections is the manipulation of public policy, and we are living with the impacts of gerrymandering every single day."

Official arguments

In Ohio, the state publishes an official argument from supporters and an official argument from opponents. Kevin Cain, Nadia Zaiem, Michael Ahern, Annette Tucker Sutherland, and Michele Roberts, the petitioners' committee for Citizens Not Politicians, wrote the official argument supporting Issue 1. The argument is below: Note: Use your mouse to scroll over the text below to view the ballot language.

“

When politicians draw biased voting districts to ensure their own re-election, it's called gerrymandering, and independent, nonpartisan experts have found that Ohio is one of the most gerrymandered states in America. In fact, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled 7 times that gerrymandered voting district maps —crafted by politicians under the current system — were unconstitutional. Ohio’s current system allows politicians of both parties and their lobbyist friends to gerrymander voting districts in secret backroom deals to manipulate the outcomes to benefit themselves Voting YES on Issue 1 will ban politicians and lobbyists and make it illegal to gerrymander voting districts. Issue 1 will: Create the 15-member Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission made up of Democratic, Republican, and Independent citizens who broadly represent the different geographic areas and demographics of the state. Ban politicians, political party officials and lobbyists from sitting on the Commission. Require fair and impartial districts by making it unconstitutional to draw voting districts that discriminate against or favor any political party or individual politician. Require the Commission to operate under an open and independent process. A broad spectrum of Ohioans, including Republicans, Independents, and Democrats all support Issue 1. More than 100 organizations from across the state have endorsed the measure, and a bipartisan group of 85 civic, community and business leaders endorsed Issue 1 as well. Vote YES on Issue 1 to restore power to where it belongs: with citizens, not politicians.

”

Opposition

Ohio Works led the campaign in opposition to the ballot initiative. The campaign stated that Issue 1 "is a partisan power grab by elite, out-of-state special interests who want to rig Ohio’s elections and impose gerrymandering into Ohio’s constitution."

Opponents

Officials

• U.S. Rep. Troy Balderson (R)
• U.S. Rep. Mike Carey (R)
• U.S. House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R)
• U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R)
• U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R)
• U.S. Rep. David Joyce (R)
• U.S. Rep. Michael Rulli (R)
• U.S. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R)
• U.S. Rep. Michael Turner (R)
• U.S. Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R)
• Gov. Richard Michael DeWine (R)
• State Sen. Matt Dolan (R)
• State Sen. Theresa Gavarone (R)
• Senate President Matt Huffman (R)
• State Sen. Robert McColley (R)
• State Sen. Michele Reynolds (R)
• State Rep. Adam Bird (R)
• State Rep. Angela King (R)
• State Rep. Nick Santucci (R)
• House Speaker Jason Stephens (R)
• State Rep. Josh Williams (R)
• State Auditor Keith Faber (R)
• Lieutenant Governor Jon Husted (R)
• Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R)
• State Treasurer Robert Sprague (R)

Former Officials

• State Rep. John E. Barnes Jr. (D)
• Secretary of State Ken Blackwell (R)
• State Rep. Bernadine Kennedy Kent (D)
• U.S. Rep. Jim Renacci (R)
• U.S. Rep. Steve Stivers (R)
• President Donald Trump (Conservative Party, Republican Party)

Political Parties

• Republican Party of Ohio

Corporations

• American Financial Group, Inc.

Organizations

• America First Policy Institute
• American Action Network
• American Jobs and Growth PAC
• Americans for Prosperity
• Americans for Public Trust
• Black Equity and Redistricting Fund
• Buckeye Firearms Association
• Center for Christian Virtue
• Defending American Values
• Election Transparency Initiative
• Fair Elections Fund
• GOPAC Education Fund
• Heritage Action for America
• Honest Elections Project
• National Federation of Independent Business
• Ohio Chamber of Commerce
• Ohio Farm Bureau
• Ohio Manufacturers' Association
• Ohio Oil & Gas Association
• Ohio Right to Life
• Ohioans for a Healthy Economy
• The Concord Fund
• The Revitalization Project

Individuals

• Jimmy Haslam - Owner of Cleveland Browns
• Susan Haslam - Owner of Cleveland Browns
• Vivek Ramaswamy (R) - Former Presidential Candidate
• Alex Triantafilou - Chairman of Ohio Republican Party
• Jeffrey Yass - Co-founder of Susquehanna International Group

Arguments

• Ohio Senate President Matt Huffman (R-12): "This campaign should be called Political Outcomes Over People. It is designed to gerrymander guaranteed political wins for the progressive left with no accountability to the more than 70% of voters who approved the current system that produced a unanimous bipartisan set of maps for the General Assembly."
• Garth Kant, Senior Press Secretary of the Ohio Senate Majority Caucus: "The proposal is actually a Trojan Horse plan to 'fix' our redistricting laws for drawing Congressional and Statehouse maps by replacing an amendment voters overwhelmingly approved in 2015 with an exceedingly complex, harebrained, and radical scheme. ... Radical progressives are using the same tactic around the country: falsely claiming Republicans are gerrymandering and promoting a 'bipartisan' fix that would actually favor real gerrymandering by Democrats."
• State Auditor Keith Faber (R): “It’s interesting to me that the only place you see the progressives and leftists doing this kind of proposal are in red states. You don’t see this in New York. You don’t see this in New Jersey. You don’t see this in other places. That ought to tell you more about what you are seeking, and what they’re seeking is an outcome.”
• Gov. Mike DeWine (R): "I’m afraid that if this amendment passes, in a relatively short time, after the voters see the results and see the districts that have been produced, voters would once again demand change, and would be even more disillusioned."
• Lt Gov. Jon Husted (R): "By definition, proportionality will set a fixed number of heavily Republican or Democratic districts, largely eliminating competitive general elections. This violates the goal of any rational redistricting proposal, which should keep communities together and allow for as many competitive districts as possible. Issue 1’s flawed concept of proportionality would be embedded in the Ohio Constitution, forcing Ohioans to accept a fixed number of heavily partisan districts."
• Former President Donald Trump (R): "Ohio Democrats and left-wing special interest groups are spending more than $26 million to rig Elections through the Issue 1 redistricting scam. Issue 1 would guarantee that unqualified redistricting commissioners are not accountable to Ohio voters, and would be impossible to remove them if they abuse their power - Issue 1 will cost Ohio taxpayers millions of dollars, and would force the State to pay redistricting commission lawyers unlimited legal expenses, with no accountability. Ohio voters need to stop this Democrat takeover of legislative redistricting."
• Joe D. 'Buck' Ruth, Website Manager for Buckeye Firearms Association: "On its face, the amendment's objective is worthy, right? After all, it would create an Ohio Citizen Redistricting Commission of 15 'citizens, not politicians' — five Democrats, five Republicans, and five 'independents' — who would together draw what they view as fair and impartial districts. ... Who are these independents? Are they nonpartisans who are purple in nature and don't support conservative or liberal causes? Of course, not."
• Senate Majority Leader Robert McColley (R-1): "If Issue 1 passes, it will set a dangerous precedent that progressive politicians and wealthy foreign donors can manipulate our state and put their agenda ahead of the people of Ohio. Ohioans must recognize what’s at stake. We have the power to protect our elections from foreign-backed partisan activists."

Official arguments

In Ohio, the state publishes an official argument from supporters and an official argument from opponents. The Ohio Works PAC wrote the official argument opposing Issue 1. The argument is below: Note: Use your mouse to scroll over the text below to view the ballot language.

“

Issue 1 is a cynical attempt to trick Ohio voters by promising to end gerrymandering and empower citizens when in fact the amendment forces gerrymandering in the Ohio constitution and removes accountability to Ohio voters. POLITICAL AND RACIAL GERRYMANDERING Issue 1 will require Ohio’s legislative districts be gerrymandered to ensure that Republicans and Democrats can each win a set number of seats in the General Assembly and Congress. Ohio voters could be stuck with a representative from the opposite party on the opposite end of the state who doesn’t share their point of view. Issue 1 will allow for maps to divide any county, city or township into as many districts as necessary to achieve the set number of seats. It will also create legislative districts with strange shapes like the famous “snake on the lake” district that has defined Ohio gerrymandering for years. UNACCOUNTABLE BUREAUCRACY Issue 1 creates an unaccountable commission whose members are chosen out of a hat by four retired judges, an unknown private hiring firm and commission members themselves. Commission members would not be required to meet any minimum level of qualifications and will be forced to hire consultants to draw maps. Once appointed, Ohio voters cannot remove any commission member even if they commit a felony. Issue 1 grants these unelected commission members with virtually unlimited power to spend Ohio tax dollars with no control by Ohio voters. Commission members could pay themselves whatever salaries they choose, and force Ohio taxpayers to pay for as many expensive lawyers as they need. Issue 1 is nothing more than a partisan power grab by elite out-of-state special interests who want to rig Ohio’s elections and impose gerrymandering into Ohio’s constitution. VOTE NO ON ISSUE 1.

”

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Ohio ballot measures

Citizens Not Politicians registered as a political action committee (PAC) to support the ballot initiative. The PAC received $43.4 million.

Ohio Works registered as a political action committee (PAC) to oppose the ballot initiative. The PAC received $7.5 million.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$40,937,430.74	$2,496,843.62	$43,434,274.36	$40,934,780.35	$43,431,623.97
Oppose	$7,474,374.00	$65,378.13	$7,539,752.13	$7,473,438.00	$7,538,816.13
Total	$48,411,804.74	$2,562,221.75	$50,974,026.49	$48,408,218.35	$50,970,440.10

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee supporting the measure.

Committees in support of Issue 1
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Citizens Not Politicians	$40,937,430.74	$2,496,843.62	$43,434,274.36	$40,934,780.35	$43,431,623.97
Total	$40,937,430.74	$2,496,843.62	$43,434,274.36	$40,934,780.35	$43,431,623.97

Donors

The following were the top donors to the committee.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Article IV	$10,700,000.00	$0.00	$10,700,000.00
Sixteen Thirty Fund	$6,550,000.00	$119,800.00	$6,669,800.00
Our American Future Foundation	$4,450,000.00	$0.00	$4,450,000.00
American Civil Liberties Union	$4,150,000.00	$31,716.00	$4,181,716.00
Ohio Progressive Collaborative	$2,000,000.00	$221,640.64	$2,221,640.64

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee opposing the measure.

Committees in opposition to Issue 1
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Ohio Works	$7,474,374.00	$65,378.13	$7,539,752.13	$7,473,438.00	$7,538,816.13
Total	$7,474,374.00	$65,378.13	$7,539,752.13	$7,473,438.00	$7,538,816.13

Donors

The following were the top donors to the committee.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
American Jobs and Growth PAC	$1,750,000.00	$0.00	$1,750,000.00
Ohioans for a Healthy Economy	$1,200,000.00	$0.00	$1,200,000.00
Ohio Manufacturers' Association	$560,000.00	$0.00	$560,000.00
Jeffrey Yass	$500,000.00	$0.00	$500,000.00
American Action Network	$400,000.00	$0.00	$400,000.00

Comparison to similar ballot measures

The following chart provides information on the contributions to campaigns surrounding ballot measures to create non-politician redistricting commissions, also known as independent redistricting commissions:

Polls

See also: 2024 ballot measure polls

Are you aware of a poll on this ballot measure that should be included below? You can share ballot measure polls, along with source links, with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

Ohio Issue 1, Establish the Citizens Redistricting Commission Initiative (2024)
Poll	Dates	Sample size	Margin of error	Support	Oppose	Undecided

Bowling Green State University/YouGov Survey	10/10/2024 - 10/21/2024	500 LV	± 5.14%	57.0%	34.0%	9.0%
	Question: "This November, voters will be asked whether they approve or reject Issue 1. Issue 1 is an amendment to the Ohio Constitution to change the redistricting process in the state. A ‘Yes’ vote would establish a new bipartisan redistricting commission composed of 15 members equally divided between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. All members and family members of the Commission will not have held a local, state, or federal elected position for the previous six years. Commissioners cannot have been registered as a lobbyist in Ohio or the federal government for the preceding six years as well. The amendment seeks to ban partisan gerrymandering that favors one political party and disfavors others. If the election were held today, would you vote ‘Yes’ in favor of Issue 1 or ‘No’ to reject Issue 1 — the Citizens Redistricting Commission Initiative."

Bowling Green State University/YouGov Survey	9/18/2024 - 9/27/2024	1,000 LV	± 3.6%	60%	20%	20%
	Question: "This November, voters will be asked whether they approve or reject Issue 1."

Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.

Media editorials

See also: 2024 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

The following media editorial boards published an editorial supporting the ballot measure:

• The Toledo Blade Editorial Board: "... [T]he problem in Ohio isn’t the formula used to draw legislative districts; it’s the makeup of the body creating the political boundaries. ... But 15 engaged citizens — five Republicans, five Democrats, and five independents — will have no reason to seek personal political advantage, which is why this reform plan is the best option. ... Ohio Issue 1 is recognition that state government belongs to citizens. Districts drawn by civic-minded Ohioans in public view can help restore trust in state government that has been eroded by constant scandal always tied to partisan political advantage."
• The Columbus Dispatch Editorial Board: "The best proof that Issue 1 will work can be found in the false claims of Republicans, especially the ballot language that misrepresents the amendment. They even convinced the current Ohio Supreme Court to harm its credibility by allowing the wording. We urge everyone to read the amendment's actual wording. Make no mistake, Issue 1 will end gerrymandering and remove self-serving politicians from the process. Neither party would control the maps. We heartily endorse Issue 1 as a critical step in reforming Ohio's state government and attracting more moderate candidates to run in their party primaries with reasonable hopes of prevailing into a fair general election."
• The Plain Dealer Editorial Board: "Successful government in the United States is predicated on the notion that people who seek elected office will carry out their duties in good faith. Sadly, in Ohio at least, when it comes to drawing the lines for congressional and Statehouse districts, good faith goes out the window. Whichever party is in power can’t resist the temptation to cook the books and give themselves congressional and state legislative seats out of proportion to how state voters break down by party. The result is grossly disproportionate representation, as we have now in Ohio. Issue 1 on the Nov. 5 ballot would restore good faith to the mapmaking by ousting from the process the elected officials, politicians, lobbyists or anyone else with a vested interest in cheating."
• The Cincinnati Enquirer Editorial Board: "Ohioans have given elected leaders plenty of chances to draw fair maps, but they've repeatedly failed to do so, defying the will of voters and thumbing their noses at rulings from the Ohio Supreme Court. Voters must not let this moment to end Ohio's legacy of gerrymandering slip by."

Opposition

The following media editorial boards published an editorial opposing the ballot measure:

• The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board: "Memo to Ohio voters: The 'independent' redistricting commission proposal on your ballot this November is nothing of the sort. The measure is funded by progressives to hand a permanent advantage to Democrats. ... Proponents say the idea would create a “bipartisan” system to end gerrymandering. But the giveaway of the real purpose is that the ballot measure is funded by a partisan coterie of unions and major national progressive nonprofits. The goal is to enshrine progressive gerrymandering in Ohio’s constitution. ... Ohio’s Congressional delegation is currently 11 Republicans and six Democrats, which reflects the state electorate’s turn to the right and a mildly partisan gerrymander. But at least lawmakers on the current redistricting commission are accountable to voters."

Background

State legislative redistricting in Ohio

As of 2024, Ohio utilized a political commission to redistrict the General Assembly. A politician commission is independent of the legislature but is composed of members who can hold political office. In Ohio, the politician commission was called the Ohio Redistricting Commission, which was adopted via constitutional amendment in 2015.

The Ohio Redistricting Commission had seven members: the governor, state auditor, secretary of state, and four appointed individuals: one by the speaker of the House of Representatives, one by the House's largest opposition party leader, one by the president of the Ohio Senate, and one by the Senate's largest opposition party leader.

To approve a redistricting plan for 10 years, at least two members from each major political party needed to agree. If the commission failed to pass a plan with bipartisan support, they could pass a plan with a simple majority vote of any four members, but this plan would only be effective for four years.

The constitutional amendment required the commission to "attempt to draw a general assembly district plan" that does not "favor or disfavor a political party," including requiring that the proportion of legislative districts that "favor each political party... correspond[s] closely to the statewide preferences of the voters of Ohio."

Ohio Issue 1, Redistricting Commission Amendment (2015)

See also: Ohio Issue 1, Redistricting Commission Amendment (2015)

In 2015, voters approved Ohio Issue 1, which created the seven-member Ohio Redistricting Commission to provide for state legislative districts. The vote was 71.47% to 28.53%.

The Ohio State Legislature voted to refer Issue 1 to the ballot for voters to decide. In the House, the vote was 28-1, and in the Senate, the vote was 82-8. Eight legislative Republicans and one Democrat voted against the amendment. State Rep. Rep. Matt Huffman (R-4) was the amendment's lead sponsor. He co-chaired the campaign supporting Issue 1, Fair Districts for Ohio, with Rep. Vernon Sykes (D-34). No PACs were organized to oppose Issue 1.

Fair Districts for Ohio received $319,466 in contributions. The three largest donors were the Ohio Consumer Lenders Association ($100,000), the Ohio Education Association ($50,000), and the Wholesale Beer & Wine Association of Ohio ($50,000).

Compared to other states

See also: State-by-state redistricting procedures

As of 2024, the 50 states used the following state legislative redistricting processes:

• 34 had legislature-dominated redistricting processes;
• nine had non-politician redistricting commissions;
• five had politician redistricting commissions; and
• two had hybrid processes.

The following map illustrates the process used in each state for state legislative redistricting:

Congressional redistricting in Ohio

As of 2024, Ohio used a process with conditional steps for congressional redistricting, which voters adopted via constitutional amendment in 2018. Before 2018, the General Assembly was responsible for congressional redistricting. The process adopted in 2018 required the following:

• (1) The General Assembly could adopt a 10-year congressional redistricting plan with 60 percent of members in each legislative chamber voting in favor, including at least 50% of Republicans and 50% of Democrats.

• (2) If the legislature fails to meet these vote requirements, the seven-member Ohio Redistricting Commission, established via Issue 1 in 2015, would have a chance to adopt a 10-year congressional redistricting plan with support from at least two members of the minority party.

• (3) If the commission fails to adopt a plan, the legislature will have a second chance to adopt a 10-year plan with the lower requirement of support from only one-third of the members of each of the two major parties.

• (4) Failure at this stage would result in the legislature adopting a plan through a simple majority vote, without a bipartisan vote requirement but with stricter criteria. The plan would last for two general election cycles (four years) instead of 10 years.

The constitutional amendment provided the Ohio Supreme Court with exclusive, original jurisdiction over cases arising from challenges under the amendment's provisions.

Ohio Issue 1, Congressional Redistricting Procedures Amendment (2018)

See also: Ohio Issue 1, Congressional Redistricting Procedures Amendment (May 2018)

In 2018, voters approved Ohio Issue 1, which changed the legislative vote requirements to pass congressional redistricting maps and the standards used in congressional redistricting. The vote was 74.89% to 25.11%.

The Ohio State Legislature voted to refer Issue 1 to the ballot for voters to decide. In the House, the vote was 83-10, and in the Senate, the vote was 31-0. Six legislative Republicans and four Democrats voted against the amendment. State Sen. Matt Huffman (R-12) and Sen. Vernon Sykes (D-28) were the amendment's lead sponsors. The Coalition for Redistricting Reform led the campaign in support of Issue 1. No PACs were organized to oppose Issue 1.

The Coalition for Redistricting Reform received $221,686 in contributions. The three largest donations came from Strong Communities Ohio ($56,977), the National Democratic Redistricting Committee PAC ($50,000), and two organizations that each contributed $15,000—Ohioans for a Healthy Economy and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company.

Compared to other states

See also: State-by-state redistricting procedures

As of 2024, 44 states conducted congressional redistricting. The remaining six states did not because those states had one congressional district. Of those 44 states:

• 33 had legislature-dominated redistricting processes;
• eight had non-politician redistricting commissions;
• one had a politician redistricting commission; and
• two had hybrid processes.

The following map illustrates the process used in each state for congressional redistricting:

History of redistricting commission ballot measures

From 1983 to 2023, there were 14 ballot measures to create non-politician redistricting commissions, also known as independent redistricting commissions, in 10 states. Voters approved 10 and rejected four ballot measures.

Before 2024, the most recent votes were in Colorado and Michigan, where ballot measures were approved. In Colorado, legislators voted to refer the constitutional amendments to the ballot. In Michigan, a campaign, Voters Not Politicians, initiated the constitutional amendment.

As of 2024, there had been at least one ballot measure to repeal a non-politician redistricting commission. In 2010, voters in California rejected Proposition 27, which would have eliminated the state's Citizens Redistricting Commission.

The following list is of non-politician redistricting commissions. There are also hybrid commissions, which are composed of politicians and non-politicians, such as the one that voters approved in Virginia in 2020. Voters in Missouri also approved a non-politician, non-commission initiative in 2018, and then voted to repeal the provision in 2020.

Year	State	Type	Measure	Outcome	Yes vote	No vote
2018	Colorado	LRCA	Amendment Y: Independent Congressional Redistricting Commission	a	71.37%	28.63%
2018	Colorado	LRCA	Amendment Z: Independent Legislative Redistricting Commission	a	71.07%	28.93%
2018	Michigan	CICA	Proposal 2: Independent Redistricting Commission Initiative	a	61.27%	38.73%
2018	Utah	CISS	Proposition 4: Independent Advisory Redistricting Commission	a	50.34%	49.66%
2016	South Dakota	CICA	Amendment T: Independent Redistricting Commission Initiative	d	42.97%	57.03%
2012	Ohio	CICA	Issue 2: Independent Redistricting Commission Initiative	d	36.82%	63.18%
2010	California	CICA	Proposition 20: Independent Congressional Redistricting Commission Initiative	a	61.23%	38.77%
2008	California	CICA	Proposition 11: Independent Legislative Redistricting Commission Initiative	a	50.82%	49.18%
2005	Ohio	CICA	Issue 4: Independent Redistricting Commission Initiative	d	30.30%	69.70%
2000	Arizona	CICA	Proposition 106: Independent Redistricting Commission Initiative	a	56.14%	43.86%
1998	Alaska	LRCA	Ballot Measure 3: Reapportionment Board Amendment	a	52.14%	47.86%
1994	Idaho	LRCA	SJR 105: Reapportionment Commission Amendment	a	64.11%	35.89%
1990	California	CICA/SS	Proposition 119: Citizens Redistricting Commission Initiative	d	36.19%	63.81%
1983	Washington	CICA/SS	SJR 103: Redistricting Commission Amendment	a	61.07%	38.93%

Path to the ballot

Process in Ohio

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Ohio

In Ohio, the number of signatures required to get an initiated constitutional amendment placed on the ballot is equal to 10 percent of the votes cast in the preceding gubernatorial election. Ohio also requires initiative sponsors to submit 1,000 signatures with the initial petition application. Ohio has a signature distribution requirement, which requires that signatures be gathered from at least 44 of Ohio's 88 counties. Petitioners must gather signatures equal to a minimum of half the total required percentage of the gubernatorial vote in each of the 44 counties. Petitions are allowed to circulate for an indefinite period of time. Signatures are due 125 days prior to the general election that proponents want the initiative on.

The requirements to get an initiated constitutional amendment certified for the 2024 ballot:

• Signatures: 413,488 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit the signatures was July 3, 2024.

County boards of elections are responsible for verifying signatures, and the secretary of state must determine the sufficiency of the signature petition at least 105 days before the election. If the first batch of signatures is determined to be insufficient, the petitioners are given a ten-day window to collect more signatures.

Stages of this ballot initiative

The campaign Citizens Not Politicians proposed the ballot initiative. Attorney General Dave Yost (R) rejected two versions of the proposal on August 23 and September 14, 2023. He approved a third version on October 2, 2023. However, Citizens Not Politicians noticed a typo in the text and submitted a fourth version on October 31, 2023. Yost approved this final version on November 9, 2023.

The Ohio Ballot Board approved the final version as containing a single subject on November 28, 2023.

Citizens Not Politicians gathered signatures between November 28, 2023, and July 1, 2024, when the campaign filed 731,306 signatures.

On July 23, Secretary of State Frank LaRose announced that 535,005 signatures were verified, exceeding the requirement of 413,488. He said the submitted signatures also met the state's distribution requirement.

Sponsors of the measure hired Advanced Micro Targeting to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $7,137,500.00 was spent to collect the 413,488 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $17.26.

Citizens Not Politicians v. Ohio Ballot Board

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Does the board-approved ballot language for Issue 1 violate the state constitution's requirement that the language "properly and lawfully describes the Amendment" and not "mislead, deceive, or defraud the voters?"
Court: Ohio Supreme Court
Ruling: The Ohio Supreme Court ordered two changes to the ballot language. However, most of the challenges were rejected.
Plaintiff(s): Citizens Not Politicians, Cara Dillon, and Annette Tucker Sutherland	Defendant(s): Ohio Ballot Board and Secretary of State Frank LaRose

  Source: Ohio Supreme Court

On August 16, 2024, the five-member Ohio Ballot Board voted 3-2 to approve ballot language for Issue 1. The board’s three Republicans voted for the language, and the two Democrats voted against the language.

Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) said his office wrote the language. He said, "The summary approved by the board is fair and factual, and it accurately identifies the substance of the proposed amendment.”

Attorney Don McTigue, representing Citizens Not Politicians, said, “The language is stunning in it being false and misleading, and it is unabashed in terms of its prejudicial language.”

On August 19, Citizens Not Politicians filed litigation against the Ohio Ballot Board and LaRose, asking the Ohio Supreme Court to require the board to reconvene and "adopt ballot language that properly and lawfully describes the Amendment." You can read more about the litigation here.

On September 16, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the Ohio Ballot Board must reconvene to make two changes to the ballot language. However, most of the challenges were rejected. Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-23) responded, saying that while the decision "enables Ohioans to make a more informed choice by addressing some of the most deceptive language, other misleading and argumentative language still remains." Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) responded, saying the decision was "a huge win for Ohio voters, who deserve an honest explanation of what they’re being asked to decide."

On September 18, the Ohio Ballot Board reconvened and voted 3-2 to approve the new language. The three Republicans voted for the language, and the two Democrats voted against the language.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Ohio

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Ohio.

How to vote in Ohio

Poll times

In Ohio, all polling places are open from 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Voters who are in line at 7:30 p.m. are permitted to vote.

Registration

Check your voter registration status here.

To register to vote in Ohio, an applicant must be a United States citizen, a resident of Ohio for at least 30 days before the election, and at least 18 years old by the day of the election. Individuals who are incarcerated for a felony conviction, have been declared by a court to be incompetent for voting purposes, or have been permanently disenfranchised may not register to vote.

Applicants may register to vote online, in person, or by mail. The Ohio Voter Registration and Information Update Form is available online and can be requested by mail. In-person voter registration is available at various locations including the secretary of state and board of elections offices, Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles offices, public libraries and high schools, and other state agencies. A full list of locations is available here.

The deadline to register to vote is 30 days before the next election. An Ohio driver’s license number, state ID card number, or the last four digits of a SSN is required in order to register to vote or update a voter registration.

Automatic registration

Ohio does not practice automatic voter registration.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

Ohio has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

Ohio does not allow same-day voter registration.

Residency requirements

Prospective voters must be residents of Ohio for at least 30 days before the election.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Ohio does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual must attest that they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote. According to the state's voter registration application, "whoever commits election falsification is guilty of a felony of the fifth degree."

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The Ohio Secretary of State’s Office allows residents to check their voter registration status online by visiting this website.

Voter ID requirements

Ohio requires voters to present photo identification while voting.

The following list of accepted ID was current as of April 2023. Click here for the Ohio Secretary of State page on accepted ID to ensure you have the most current information.

“

Ohio driver's license; State of Ohio ID card; Interim ID form issued by the Ohio BMV; A US passport; A US passport card; US military ID card; Ohio National Guard ID card; or US Department of Veterans Affairs ID card All photo IDs must have the following: An expiration date that has not passed; A photograph of the voter; The voter’s name, which must substantially conform to the voter’s name as it appears in the Poll List or in the Poll Book

”

See also

2024 measures

• 2024 ballot measures
• Redistricting measures on the ballot

Ohio

• Ohio ballot measures
• Ohio ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Ohio Initiative Petition (2024)