Latest news with #D-Columbus
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ohio bill would ban exclusive streaming contracts for college sports
Ohio State Buckeyes football helmet.(Photo by) A bill proposed in the Ohio Senate would ban exclusive streaming contracts for college sports, stopping fans from needing to pay for numerous services to watch their favorite teams. The national championship-winning Ohio State University football team played Michigan State University last season. But it was a game you could only watch on Peacock, NBC's streaming service — something that OSU fan and state Sen. Bill DeMora, D-Columbus, was angry about. 'I don't have streaming services because, again, I can't afford to spend all that on the streaming service,' he said. 'The fact that I wasn't able to watch an Ohio State game about killed me.' In recent years, streaming services have been getting exclusive contracts to broadcast college athletics. If you don't pay for the services, you don't get to watch. DeMora said this adds up, since the Big 10 has a deal with Peacock and the Middle Atlantic Conference (MAC) has one with ESPN subsidiaries ESPN+ and ESPNU. This could be especially difficult for people who can't access or don't have high-speed internet, he said. 'They can't watch streaming TV even if they wanted to pay the extra money for it,' he continued. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Since DeMora is not only a fan, but also a state senator, he introduced Senate Bill 94, which would prohibit public universities from giving exclusive broadcasting rights to a streaming service. 'The streams were lagging, pixelated, out of sync and plagued by poor audio quality,' DeMora said during recent testimony on the bill. 'People were paying for something that was horrible quality to start.' WEWS/OCJ reached out to both the BIG 10 and MAC conferences, the different streaming services and their owners — as well as OSU, Kent State and the University of Akron. Akron said they didn't have a comment yet, and Kent declined to comment. But Ohio State did chime in. 'Media rights agreements are negotiated by the Big Ten on behalf of all conference members, and broadcast rights for specific athletic events are controlled by the designated media partner in accordance with the larger media rights agreement,' OSU spokesperson Ben Johnson said. State Rep. Josh Williams (R-Sylvania) said this was a 'kind of stupid' bill. 'Imagine the Buckeyes not being part of the Big 10 anymore because a simple piece of legislation said you can't sign up to a streaming deal,' Williams said. 'I think it's ill-advised, ill-conceived and it won't get any support.' This bill could hurt the schools, he added. 'You're going to stop universities from a revenue stream that they can generate off of their athletic programs that they use to reinvest into their athletic facilities,' the Republican said. The legislation would also allow students to watch broadcasts for free. The legislation would require state universities to provide enrolled students access, but it is up to the school's discretion how that is implemented. Johnson explained that Peacock does give a student discount. Right now, the premium subscription for students is $2.99 per month for a year, down from $7.99. Once a year passes, students will have to pay $7.99 per month. 'Having to pay extra to watch their teammates and classmates' sporting events isn't fair to them,' DeMora argued. Williams disagreed with this argument and the Democrat's frustration with the cost in general. 'That's like saying someone can't afford the purchase of a television, so therefore games shouldn't be televised,' Williams said. The general public is with him on what he calls the streaming epidemic, DeMora said. 'It's not fair to the everyday fan,' he said. The bill will be subject to more hearings in the coming weeks. Both DeMora and Williams have proposed football-related legislation. The Democrat proposed a bill that would prevent state money from going towards professional sports teams that have losing records. Williams, in the last General Assembly, introduced a bill that would make planting a flag in the center of the Ohio Stadium football field illegal. He proposed this after a brawl broke out when University of Michigan players tried to plant a flagpole after they beat OSU. Follow WEWS statehouse reporter Morgan Trau on Twitter and Facebook. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bipartisan bill would offer legal support for Ohioans facing eviction
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — A bipartisan bill would offer state funding for legal costs to low-income Ohioans facing eviction, an issue of great concern in Franklin County. Sponsored by State Sens. Michele Reynolds (R-Canal Winchester) and Hearcel Craig (D-Columbus), Senate Bill 83 would revise eviction and property laws in Ohio to assist households facing eviction. The bill would establish a legal services housing defense fund to finance legal services to eligible Ohioans, bringing more direct state support for residents in eviction hearings. According to the Eviction Lab, eviction is a prevailing concern in Franklin County. There have been more than 100,000 eviction filings in Franklin County in the past five years, 25% of which occurred in the past year alone. What to know as Canada geese nest across central Ohio Franklin County evictions noticeably increased after COVID-19. According to the Eviction Lab, evictions from the past year are 39% higher than average eviction filings before COVID-19. Further, data shows the eviction crisis is likely to worsen as pandemic-era federal funding runs out. See previous coverage of eviction concerns in the video player above. Senate Bill 83 wants to reduce barriers for Ohioans facing eviction. The new state fund would cover legal costs for eligible households, or households with an established annual income under 300% of the federal poverty level. Poverty levels vary by household size, but a four-person home would be eligible if it makes less than $96,450 annually. The bill would also allow parties involved in eviction filings to request nonbinding mediation to help come to an understanding. To help protect tenants' rights, any eviction notice would have to include the right to free legal representation and information on how to see if they are eligible. S.B. 83 would keep all associated records private until an eviction was formalized. Any eviction case documents could also be removed from public record if both parties agree to it. In those cases, only authorized judicial staff, parties directly involved in the case or someone with a court order could access the records. What's new and coming soon at Easton Town Center The bill would also adjust property and inspection laws. Under S.B. 83, any property transaction would need to provide proof the involved parties are real people before the county auditor would endorse the sale. Building code enforcement certification would also have to be 'as accessible as possible' without compromising safety. Finally, S.B. 83 would require inspections of construction projects within 30 days of receiving a plan review or inspection request. Local building boards would also have to publish a list of approved and certified third-party inspectors. 'How we resolve the housing crisis impacts our future economic development and the strength of our schools and local governments,' Craig said. S.B. 83 was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee in February but has not had hearings since. The program would require the General Assembly to allocate funding to the bill, and it could emerge in ongoing Senate discussions of Ohio's biennial budget. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
27-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sweeping Ohio higher education bill up for governor's signature
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Ohio Republican lawmakers sent a bill that makes sweeping changes to public universities to Gov. Mike DeWine's desk on Wednesday. One of the largest, and most controversial parts of Senate Bill 1, strips all use of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices at Ohio's public universities. Not just DEI: Seven things to know about Ohio's sweeping higher ed bill 'There is nothing positive about this bill,' state Sen. Bill DeMora (D-Columbus) said. 'It is going to ruin higher education in Ohio.' 'DEI has become a system that sorts us,' state Sen. Michele Reynolds (R-Canal Winchester) said. 'It sorts us by race, by gender and by identity.' There are two exceptions to the DEI elimination in the bill: Clarifies that the bill's DEI prohibitions do not prohibit a state institution from complying with any state or federal law to provide disability services or to limit student organizations including fraternities and sororities. Carves out the opportunity for a university to apply to the chancellor of higher education for an exemption to the DEI ban. The university will need to demonstrate a need for the exemption, like for purposes of accreditation of a specific program. The bill also prohibits faculty from striking, creates a new civics course required for graduation with a few exceptions, and prohibits universities from taking stances on 'controversial topics.' Controversial topics are defined in the bill as 'any belief or policy that is the subject of political controversy, including issues such as climate policies, electoral politics, foreign policy, diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, immigration policy, marriage, or abortion.' Columbus residents cautioned about 'brake checking' and staged accident risks Now that it is on the governor's desk, will he sign it? Those against the bill are calling for a veto, but DeWine said on March 14 that he will 'probably sign it.' Then again on March 21, he doubled down. 'I've already indicated I'll probably sign it,' he said. 'But I always reserve the right to make sure I know exactly what's in the bill and what's been put in the bill.' Earlier this week, on Monday, DeWine said he was 'still looking at the bill,' but by Wednesday, said again he would probably sign it. While the bill's opposition hopes that DeWine stops this from becoming law, GOP leaders said they are almost certain a veto will not be happening. Measles outbreak reported in Ohio after several more cases confirmed 'If this was going to be vetoed by Gov. DeWine, we would've certainly taken a different tact,' Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman (R-Lima) said. 'So, I don't think that's going to [happen].' Once DeWine officially gets the bill on his desk, which sometimes happens a few days after passage from the statehouse, he will have ten days to decide whether he signs or vetoes it. If DeWine does sign it, it will go into effect 90 days after his signature. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Ohio Senator introduces a bill in response to the Ohio Supreme Court boneless wings ruling
Ohio state Sen. William DeMora, D-Columbus, speaks at the Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio. (Photo by Graham Stokes for Ohio Capital Journal. Republish photo only with original story.) An Ohio Democratic Senator recently introduced a bill in response to last summer's Ohio Supreme Court ruling saying that a man who ordered boneless wings should have expected bones in them and denied him a jury trial after he sustained significant injuries. State Sen. Bill DeMora, D-Columbus, was outraged by the Supreme Court ruling and introduced Senate Bill 38 last month which would look at how the state determines liability when someone is injured by 'negligently prepared food from a restaurant or food supplier,' DeMora said last week in his sponsor testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In 2016, Michael Berkheimer ate boneless wings at a Southwest Ohio restaurant, but felt like he swallowed something wrong. He developed a fever later that night and ended up going to the hospital a couple days later with a 105-degree fever. The doctors discovered a nearly two inch chicken bone in his throat that ripped open the wall of his esophagus. Berkheimer developed an infection, had to undergo several surgeries, was in two medically induced comas, and had a week-long stay in intensive care. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX He sued the restaurants and their chicken suppliers in 2017, saying 'negligence' led to his injuries. The Butler County Court of Common Pleas and the Twelfth District Court of Appeals sided against Berkheimer and didn't let the case go to trial. The case went to the Ohio Supreme Court where the majority ruled the lower courts made the right decision. The ruling was four Republicans to three Democrats. The restaurant wasn't liable 'when the consumer could have reasonably expected and guarded against the presence of the injurious substance in the food,' Ohio Supreme Court Justice Joe Deters wrote in the majority opinion. This story received national attention and even ended up being a bit on 'The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.' 'What (Berkheimer) went through was horrific, timeconsuming, and costly,' DeMora said in his testimony. But the bill doesn't focus on Berkheimer's injuries, but rather how judges were the ones who decided his case. 'That's not just wrong,' DeMora said. 'It's a direct assault on the very foundation of our legal system.' S.B. 38 is trying to change that. 'It will make sure that future cases like Mr. Berkheimer's are heard by a jury – as our Constitution demands,' DeMora said. 'It will also make sure that when determining liability, we use the reasonable expectations test used by most states.' Follow Capital Journal Reporter Megan Henry on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
