Fiscal Note & Local Impact Statement
123 rd General Assembly of Ohio
|
BILL: |
DATE: |
||||
|
STATUS: |
SPONSOR: |
||||
|
LOCAL IMPACT
STATEMENT REQUIRED: |
|
||||
|
CONTENTS: |
Prohibits a convicted felon from being a candidate for or an appointee to an
office of honor, trust, or profit |
·
No
direct fiscal effect on the state.
|
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT |
FY 2000 |
FY 2001 |
FUTURE YEARS |
|||
|
Counties |
||||||
|
Revenues |
Potential minimal loss |
Potential minimal loss |
Potential minimal loss |
|||
|
Expenditures |
Potential minimal decrease
in certain cases |
- 0 - |
Potential minimal decrease
in certain cases occurring in even-numbered years |
|||
|
Municipalities and
Townships |
||||||
|
Revenues |
- 0 - |
- 0 - |
- 0 - |
|||
|
Expenditures |
- 0 - |
Potential minimal decrease
in certain cases |
Potential minimal decrease
in certain cases occurring in odd-numbered years |
|||
Note: For most local governments, the fiscal year is the calendar year. The school district fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
·
By
preventing a convicted felon from running for a public office, the bill would
eliminate any filing fee revenues that could be generated from such candidates,
and could eliminate potential legal and/or additional election costs that could
arise under current law if a convicted felon were to run for a public office
and win. Such instances would likely be quite rare.
·
There
could also be a negligible decrease in the cost of printing ballots because a
convicted felon would not have to be included on each ballot as a candidate for
public office.
|
|
Under the bill, a person who is convicted of a
felony is generally prohibited from being a candidate for, or an appointee to,
an office of honor, trust, or profit. An office of honor, trust, or profit
would include any public office. Current law (Sec. 2961.01) prohibits a felon
from holding any public office.
By preventing a convicted felon from running for a
public office, the bill would eliminate any filing fee revenues that could be
generated from such candidates, and could eliminate potential legal and/or
additional election costs that could arise under current law if a convicted
felon were to run for a public office and win. Such instances would likely be
quite rare.
There could also be a negligible decrease in the cost of printing ballots because a convicted felon would not have to be included on each ballot as a candidate for public office.
q LBO staff: Alexander C. Heckman,
Budget/Policy Analyst
\\Budget_office\isis_vol1.lbo\FN123\HB0507IN.doc