What yes or no vote really means for Ohio Issue 2 in May election
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Ohioans voting in the May 6 primary and special election will be deciding whether to pass Issue 2, a proposed constitutional amendment authorizing $2.5 billion in infrastructure funding.
If passed, Issue 2 would allow the state to give out up to $250 million in bonds annually, or $2.5 billion over the next decade, to fund local infrastructure projects, like building roads, bridges, landfills, water supply systems and more. It's a funding program dating back to 1987, and Ohio voters have renewed it three times since — in 1995 with 62% of the vote, in 2005 with 54%, and in 2014 with 65%.
Some Ohioans say proposed ban of phones in schools violates parents' rights
The amendment's passage would mark an increase in the program's spending, as the current cycle is capped at issuing $200 million annually. However, because the amendment is a bond program, it's repaid using existing revenue and will not raise taxes.
A 'yes' vote would be in support of the program and extending it for another 10 years, while a 'no' vote would be in favor of ending the program after the current cycle's projects wrap up.
Issue 2 has bipartisan support from most Statehouse lawmakers and is backed by the Strong Ohio Communities Coalition, a group of stakeholders like the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and the Ohio Contractors Association. The coalition noted that the program has funded more than 19,000 projects since 1987, and its renewal would create an estimated 35,000 construction jobs.
Annual Buckeye pinwheel planting celebrates, brings awareness to organ donations
'[The program] has a long and proven track record of success — funding vital roadway improvements and critical water safety projects across all 88 counties,' said Logan County Engineer Scott Coleman. 'Issue 2's broad support from local elected officials, business leaders, and labor groups mirrors the nearly unanimous bipartisan support the General Assembly gave inagreeing to place the renewal issue before voters on the May 6 ballot.'
A few Republican legislators said they are voting against Issue 2, and those opponents are backed by The Grassroots Freedom Initiative. One of those lawmakers is Rep. Ron Ferguson (R-Wintersville), who argues not all Ohio communities are benefiting from the program and that the state needs to find a better way to fund these infrastructure projects.
'I do think it's outdated, and it continues to grow,' Ferguson previously told NBC4. 'We're in this time where we should be making tax dollars stretch as far as possible to provide as many good, solid services for people as possible and I don't think this is the most efficient way to do that.'
Those in Ohio wishing to use mail-in voting must first submit a request form for an absentee ballot, available here, and return it by mail or in person to their county board of elections. While Ohio began mailing absentee ballots on April 8 to those who submitted a request, the deadline to request a ballot is seven days before the election on April 29.
Sheriff speaks about finding dead dogs at Madison County home
After receiving and completing their ballot, Ohioans must ensure their ballot is postmarked by the day before the election, May 5, in order to be counted. Voters can also return their absentee ballot in person to their county board of elections before the polls close at 7:30 p.m. on May 6.
Early in-person voting started on April 8. Voters can cast ballots at county boards of elections most days leading up to the weekend before special election day, so long as they come with photo identification. Here's when you can vote early:
April 14-18: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
April 21-25: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
April 28: 7:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.
April 29: 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m.
April 30 – May 2: 7:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.
May 3: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.
May 4: 1 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Ohio requires in-person voters to have a form of photo identification in order to vote. That includes an Ohio driver's license, an Ohio ID card, a U.S. passport or passport card, a U.S. military ID, a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ID, or an Ohio National Guard ID.
All identification must have an expiration date that has not passed, a photograph of the voter, and the voter's name, which must substantially conform to the voter's name as it appears in the poll list.
There are many resources on the Secretary of State's website, that will make your trip to the polls easier:
View your sample ballot here.
Find your May 6 polling location here.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
16 minutes ago
- Axios
San Antonio City Council election results show changing politics
San Antonio City Council District 1 incumbent Sukh Kaur held on to her seat in Saturday's runoff election, in which three new city councilmembers were also elected in a political shakeup. Why it matters: A new generation of councilmembers can help shape a range of transformative city plans as they work with new mayor Gina Ortiz Jones over the next four years — but they'll also have to contend with a possible budget deficit and cuts to services. By the numbers: Kaur beat out conservative neighborhood leader Patty Gibbons 65% to 35% in the downtown area district, which now also includes some neighborhoods north of Loop 410. The big picture: The San Antonio City Council could have a starker political divide. It'sgaining one more progressive and one more conservative member, who are taking over seats previously held by business-friendly and moderate Democrats. Ortiz Jones is expected to lead as a progressive. The latest: In District 6 on the Far West Side, Ric Galvan (50.1%) beat Kelly Ann Gonzalez (49.9%) by just 25 votes. Both have progressive backgrounds running in a district that has previously elected Republicans and business-friendly Democrats. In District 8 on the Northwest Side, Ivalis Meza Gonzalez (57%) beat Paula McGee (43%). Meza Gonzalez is the former chief of staff to Mayor Ron Nirenberg, while McGee had experience on city boards and support from the Republican Party of Bexar County. In District 9 on the North Side, Misty Spears (57%) beat Angi Taylor Aramburu (43%), putting this more conservative district back in Republican hands for the first time in eight years. Spears has been the director of constituent services for Republican Bexar County Commissioner Grant Moody. Flashback: The four districts headed to the June runoff after no one earned more than 50% of the vote in the May 3 election. District 4 on the Southwest Side is newly represented by Edward Mungia, a former staff member in the office. He won outright in the May election.
Axios
16 minutes ago
- Axios
San Antonio mayor live election results: Gina Ortiz Jones wins race
San Antonio on Saturday elected Gina Ortiz Jones as its next mayor, choosing a Democrat instead of Republican Rolando Pablos for a nonpartisan race that became distinctly about politics. Why it matters: The mayoral election, the city's first in 16 years without an incumbent on the ballot, drew money and influence from across the state and nation. Neither Ortiz Jones nor Pablos have held elected office before, and San Antonio has not elected a mayor who hasn't served on the City Council since Phil Hardberger in 2005. The latest: Unofficial vote results showed Ortiz Jones with 54% of the vote compared to 46% for Pablos. All precincts were counted. What they're saying: Ortiz Jones told supporters at a watch party at The Dakota East Side Ice House that voters "reminded folks what San Antonio stands for," adding "that our city is about compassion and it's about leading with everybody in mind." "But you know what, our country — I think we're going through a blip right now, but San Antonio has had the opportunity to say, you know what? We're going to move past this," she added. Pablos conceded at his watch party, per KSAT. "We tried. I want to thank everybody for your support. It was a tough race, and I'm just happy that everybody came together for this community," he said. State of play: Ortiz Jones, who is believed to be the first openly gay woman elected San Antonio mayor, served as an Air Force undersecretary in the Biden administration and was twice the Democratic nominee for the 23rd Congressional District. During the runoff campaign, both candidates leaned into their families' immigrant backgrounds. Ortiz Jones spoke of being raised by a single mother who immigrated from the Philippines and Pablos of his family moving from Mexico to El Paso when he was 8 years old. Pablos is a former Texas secretary of state who has served as a senior adviser to Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. Follow the money: Pablos and his supporters appeared to both outraise and outspend Ortiz Jones in the runoff election, campaign finance reports show. Pablos raised nearly $333,000 and spent more than $275,000 from late April through May 28. He got a big boost from the Texas Economic Fund, a political action committee run by Abbott's former political director, which raised $1.35 million and spent over $623,000 during that time. Ortiz Jones raised nearly $249,000 and spent over $133,000 in the same period. She had help from Fields of Change, a national Democratic PAC, which spent more than $160,000 for her campaign. The big picture: The new mayor will lead San Antonio at a pivotal time, as officials seek to gain public support for a new downtown Spurs arena that could be surrounded by a sports and entertainment district. They will also lead the city through the remaining years of the Trump administration, under which San Antonio has lost millions of dollars in federal funding. The city is also expecting a budget deficit. Catch up quick: Mayor Ron Nirenberg reached his term limits after eight years in office, making him the city's longest-serving mayor since Henry Cisneros in the 1980s. San Antonio's next mayor will serve for four years after voters approved increasing term length from two years. They will work alongside several new city councilmembers members. Flashback: Nirenberg's departure left a rare opening that drew a crowded 27-candidate field to replace him. Four sitting city councilmembers struggled to break through the noise as traditional backers in local elections, like the police union, sat out the first round of voting. By the numbers: Voters showed low enthusiasm for the May 3 election, which overlapped with Fiesta, at 9.26%. In the runoff, turnout rose to nearly 17%.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Stein is making the conservative case for FEMA
It's a classic Trump-era irony: The president's polarizing voice has triggered a burst of bipartisan agreement. When President Donald Trump floated the notion of scrapping FEMA entirely after Hurricane Helene, it sounded like the start of another bare-knuckle partisan fight. Instead, it sparked a rare consensus: FEMA is flawed, but it's also essential. Right now, the surprisingly high-profile defender of that notion is North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein. And in another ironic twist, the most liberal governor North Carolina has ever elected is sounding . . . conservative. Over the past two weeks, Stein has launched a media blitz to rescue FEMA from its own dysfunction — and from the president's crosshairs. He's appeared on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, penned an op-ed in USA Today, lobbied Republican U.S. Sens. Thom Tillis and Ted Budd and written directly to the Trump administration with proposed reforms. His argument is simple: Disaster response is a core function of the federal government, and it saves money and gets better results if states don't go it alone. 'It's about streamlining and reforming and improving FEMA, not eliminating it,' Stein said in a recent podcast interview with Spectrum News. That may not sound revolutionary, but in today's political climate, it's a noteworthy response. Where many Democrats, like former Gov. Roy Cooper, may have used Trump's comments to raise money or fire up the base, Stein is taking a different tack. He's responding thoughtfully, and with a message that Republicans might actually hear. FEMA makes for a convenient punching bag. After any disaster, emotions are raw as survivors try to make sense of their losses. When calls go to voicemail or a form gets rejected on a technicality, the natural response is anger. Police officers often talk about trying to give people grace because they recognize they're meeting everyone on the worst day of their life. FEMA workers are in the same position but may not always realize it, or be equipped to respond. That doesn't mean FEMA gets a pass, of course, and there were plenty of problems with its response to Hurricane Helene. Red tape kept people waiting for temporary housing. It took multiple calls from elected officials to get FEMA to extend hotel vouchers to keep people from being turned out into a snowstorm. North Carolina's own shortcomings made matters worse. An after-action report from the state's Emergency Management Division showed deep cracks in the response to Helene — unclear communications, insufficient coordination with counties and a lack of planning around debris and housing. FEMA may have failed in some areas, but so did the state. Still, it would've been easy — even expected — for Stein to point fingers or escalate the fight as President Trump continues down the path toward eliminating FEMA. Instead, he's lowering the temperature. Trump's proposal to eliminate FEMA might be a negotiation tactic rather than a policy plan. He's known for throwing rhetorical grenades to draw people to the table. Some see that as bluster, while others see leverage. Either way, if the goal is to force FEMA to improve, there's plenty of common ground. And Stein is proving to be an effective messenger. He's called for FEMA to be faster, more flexible, and less redundant. He wants a single application process, more upfront money for permanent repairs and greater use of block grants to give states more discretion. This isn't the burn-it-down approach of the MAGA right, nor is it a progressive defense of bureaucracy. It's something rarer these days: a sober, statesmanlike argument for targeted federal responsibility and reform. As a conservative, I've long believed in limiting federal power. I've written before that North Carolina should stop waiting on Washington and take control of its own future. So I sympathize with Trump's instinct to scrap FEMA entirely. There's philosophical merit to the idea. The federal government tries to do too much. State governments are more nimble, more accountable. Pushing power down is almost always the right move. But not in every case. President Reagan famously said the nine scariest words in the English language were: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' And yet Reagan also signed the Stafford Act — the law that governs FEMA to this day. That law has real flaws, and some of them are exactly what we're grappling with now. That's another classic Trump-era irony. The liberal governor of North Carolina is defending FEMA with a Reaganesque argument, to preserve a program the Gipper helped create. I still believe in federalism. But on this one, Stein has convinced me. FEMA needs to stay.
