Columbus council hears proposal to shift diversity office certifications to race-neutral small-business framework

Chair Nick Bankston convened a Columbus City Council public hearing on proposed revisions to Title 39 of the Columbus City Code, which governs the Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI), to hear presentations from the city attorney’s office and ODI on legal risks and a proposed shift toward race‑neutral procurement designations.

The proposal would add two new certifications—“small regional business enterprise” and “regional business enterprise”—and move some contracting incentives (bid discounts and incentive credits) to size-based criteria such as revenue and employee counts rather than race or gender. Director Jason Jenkins told council the change is intended to modernize ODI’s programs, expand the city’s economic footprint regionally and to preserve access to federal grant funding while continuing to certify minority‑ and women‑owned firms for statistical and cross‑certification purposes.

Deputy City Attorney Laura Baker Morris said the administration is advising the city to adjust Title 39 to reflect evolving federal law and recent case law in the Sixth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. Morris said federal executive orders and litigation create a risk that continued operation of race‑ and gender‑conscious procurement goals could jeopardize federal grants and contracts; she told the hearing that potential penalties for noncompliance can include loss of federal funds and, in some circumstances cited by counsel, civil or criminal exposure for improper use of federal funds.

Why it matters

Council members and public speakers said the stakes are high for historically disadvantaged contractors and for the city’s ability to deliver services without losing federal funding. Proponents of keeping race‑conscious remedies warned that changing incentives could reduce contracting opportunities for minority‑ and women‑owned firms. Administrators argued the proposed framework is intended as a permissive, race‑neutral path that allows ODI to continue certification work while building legally defensible evidence—through an availability study and a refreshed disparity study—about whether size‑based measures address underutilization.

What the administration proposed and why

Jason Jenkins described several elements of the proposal: creation of small regional and regional business certifications tied to firm size (revenue and employee count) rather than race; continuing certification of minority business enterprises (MBE), women’s business enterprises (WBE), veteran‑owned and LGBTQ+ firms for tracking and cross‑certification; and operational changes including an anti‑discrimination policy for primes, a prime‑mentorship program, a shelter‑market program (to direct smaller procurements toward comparably sized firms) and a dispute‑resolution process for subcontractor complaints. Jenkins said ODI is implementing spend‑tracking software (B2G) with consultant support (Aaron Powell, NKI Consulting) to better measure dollars flowing to certified firms.

Jenkins told council that, based on current estimates, “93% of our certified businesses currently have the potential to be transferred over to the small regional business program with the numbers that we’re looking at currently.” He also said the city will continue reciprocal certification arrangements with outside certifiers (state and national MSDC/OMSDC programs) to reduce administrative burden for firms.

Legal context and data work

Deputy City Attorney Morris placed the proposals in the context of federal law and case precedent. She said the city’s 2017 disparity study (using 2012–2015 data) and the city’s 2019 executive study summary informed earlier programs, but that courts and federal agencies have continued to refine standards for race‑conscious contracting. Morris described executive orders as agency‑directed policy that may become enforceable when incorporated into grant terms or when adopted through rulemaking, and she told council that the most direct exposure for the city is through contract or grant conditions tied to federal funding.

Council and ODI described a three‑part path forward the administration favors: (1) begin an availability study immediately to measure the local market and firm size distributions; (2) implement a race‑ and gender‑neutral pilot program that applies size‑based goals and incentives; and (3) conduct a renewed disparity study (the administration suggested mid to late 2026) to evaluate whether race‑neutral measures are effective or whether race‑conscious remedies remain necessary. Jenkins said some studies can take up to a year, and council members emphasized the need for precise, timely data rather than hurried changes.

Public testimony and concerns

Two people offered in‑person public comment and three written statements were entered into the record. Jay Avery Frost, who testified in person, warned that replacing race‑conscious targets with race‑neutral rules could “risk reversing years of hard‑fought progress” and urged the city to prioritize a prompt disparity study. Frost cited the city’s earlier disparity findings that, she said, showed African American firms represented up to 22.5% of available contractors but received only 3%–7% of awards in the 2012–2015 period and that those firms collectively missed $84,000,000 in potential contract opportunity in that period.

Gail Saunders, founder and CEO of Saunders PR Group and a certified minority‑ and woman‑owned business, told council ODI has been “a lifeline” that helped her company and other small businesses bid, build capacity and subcontract on larger projects. Saunders and other speakers asked council to preserve ODI’s resources and capacity and to ensure that any legal compliance steps do not undercut the office’s ability to promote contracting access.

Council response and next steps

Council President Harden and Chair Bankston repeatedly emphasized that “nothing has been decided” and that the hearing was an information session to balance legal risk, federal funding exposure and the office’s equity mission. Chair Bankston and others said the city had already paused the specific practices identified as potentially non‑compliant and that ordinance 21‑16‑2025 (the legislative vehicle containing the proposed Title 39 changes) had been referred back to committee on July 28; no final vote was set at the hearing.

Council directed further engagement: staff and the administration will undertake the availability study, pursue the software and process changes described by ODI, and return to council with more specific thresholds (size and revenue cutoffs) and data before any ordinance is scheduled for a vote. Deputy City Attorney Morris and ODI staff also said the city is monitoring multiple nationwide lawsuits challenging executive‑branch actions and would update council as litigation and administrative rulemaking evolve.

Actions taken

No ordinance vote was taken at the hearing. Council recorded that ordinance 21‑16‑2025 had been referred back to committee on July 28 and that the council would set a future return date after reviewing studies and community input. The chair also allowed one late written testimony into the record and confirmed three written submissions would be included in the public record. Council members requested more precise study timelines and further community engagement before scheduling a vote.

Ending

Council members said they plan continued review and community outreach before any change to Title 39. Chair Bankston closed the hearing after public testimony and directed staff to provide the availability‑study timeline and additional legal analysis; a date to take final action was not set.