Testimony

OHIO HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE | INTERESTED PARTY TESTIMONY ON HOUSE BILL 413

Niki Clum, Deputy Director
May 20, 2026

Chair Stewart, Vice Chair Dovilla, Ranking Member Sweeney, and members of the House Finance Committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit written interested party testimony regarding House Bill 413. 

The Ohio Mayors Alliance represents both Republican and Democratic mayors from Ohio’s 30 largest cities. We also represent the Village of South Point, which participates in our coalition on behalf of the Mayors Partnership for Progress, a regional coalition in Southeast Ohio. Our priorities include protecting the fiscal health of Ohio’s cities, preserving home rule and local control, and promoting bipartisanship and collaboration between state and local governments. 

Our mayors understand the importance of fiscal responsibility and transparency and share the goals of HB 413 to ensure that Ohio taxpayers and voters have a clear understanding of how their local governments operate, what they pay for, and how local taxpayer dollars are allocated. We appreciate the committee’s continued consideration of this legislation. Our feedback can be consolidated into three recommendations: 

1. Ensure compatibility with existing systems and provide state funding to support implementation and ongoing compliance with HB 413. 

Many of our cities already share budgets, expenditures, and other financial transparency data through their own systems and methods. To ensure that HB 413 does not become another unfunded mandate that creates additional work for already-strapped cities and municipal employees, the committee should ensure that implementation requirements conform with existing local systems, collect data in the most efficient manner possible, and provide clear and useful information for taxpayers. 

We appreciate that the current version of the bill includes a $5 million appropriation to the Treasurer of State for the creation and maintenance of the Ohio Local Government Expenditure Database. During sponsor testimony before the House Finance Committee, discussion focused on the use of artificial intelligence and related technologies to help standardize and upload local government financial data into the Ohio Checkbook system. If implemented effectively, these tools could substantially reduce administrative burdens on local governments and help make participation more manageable for communities with differing levels of technological capacity. 

However, Section 113.82 of the bill grants the Treasurer of State broad authority to adopt rules governing the types of expenditure and revenue information that must be provided, the extent of required reporting, and the manner in which information must be submitted. As a practical matter, those

decisions will determine whether the state assumes responsibility for adapting local government data into a standardized format, or whether local governments themselves will be required to purchase new software, alter accounting practices, or undertake costly data conversion efforts to comply with state submission requirements. 

While committee discussion emphasized that advances in AI technology may simplify compliance for communities of all sizes, those efficiencies will only be realized if the state’s implementation approach allows data to be provided in the formats already in use locally. If the adopted rules instead require standardized formatting or technologically sophisticated submissions at the local level, many political subdivisions may face significant new compliance costs. 

For that reason, we strongly recommend that the bill require flexibility in its implementation. 

2. Ensure technical assistance and data collection tools are robustly managed at the state level to help local governments of all sizes comply with the bill. 

State technical assistance and collaboration will be essential to successful implementation of this policy. Ohio traditionally defers many data collection responsibilities to local governments and, as a result, local financial information is maintained through a wide range of systems, technologies, and reporting practices. Because the appropriation contained in HB 413 is directed to the Treasurer of State rather than to local governments, the responsibility for standardizing, formatting, converting, and managing submitted financial data should occur at the state level, rather than through new local software, staffing, or compliance obligations. 

The bill’s $5 million appropriation to the Treasurer of State also reflects a recognition that building and maintaining a centralized expenditure database carries significant implementation and operational costs. To the extent those same responsibilities are shifted to local governments through rulemaking or related compliance requirements, political subdivisions across Ohio may face similar costs without corresponding financial support. Successful implementation will therefore depend on the state providing robust data management tools and technical support that allow local governments to submit information through their existing systems while ensuring the resulting public data is accurate, usable, and consistent statewide. 

3. Ensure implementation timelines account for the varying technological and administrative capacities of local governments across Ohio. 

The practical impact of HB 413 will depend heavily on the rules ultimately adopted by the Treasurer of State regarding what information must be reported and how it must be submitted. Local governments across Ohio operate with differing technological capabilities, staffing levels, accounting systems, and access to IT resources. In many cases, political subdivisions also report overlapping or similar financial information through multiple existing reporting systems. 

We urge the committee to ensure the rules adopted by the Treasurer of State account for the differing technological and administrative capacities of local governments across Ohio. To prevent duplicative reporting requirements and mandatory, unsupported technology changes, implementation must

prioritize flexibility and the minimization of unnecessary administrative burdens. Given the scope of the reporting and implementation requirements contemplated by HB 413, we also encourage the committee to provide at least a one-year implementation period following the bill’s effective date. This additional time would allow the Treasurer of State to develop the necessary systems and guidance while also allowing local governments adequate time to prepare for compliance. 

Thank you for your consideration of this interested party testimony on HB 413.