Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Amusement Ride Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to modernize Ohio amusement-ride inspection fees
Summary
House Bill 433 would replace a flat fee model with a fee schedule tied to inspection time and complexity; sponsors say the change makes fees equitable and industry-driven, while committee members asked about fiscal neutrality and impacts on small operators.
House Bill 433, a proposal to revise Ohio’s fee structure for amusement ride inspections, received a first hearing in the Ohio House Agriculture Committee on Tuesday.
Representatives Klopfenstein and Fowler (joint sponsors) told the committee the bill would replace a dated, flat permit fee that currently treats very different rides (for example, a small inflatable and a multi-rail roller coaster) the same. “Fees should reflect the actual cost of insuring safe rides,” a sponsor said, arguing that small operators were subsidizing inspections for larger, more complex attractions.
Sponsors said the revised structure was developed by the Ohio Department of Agriculture in collaboration with industry stakeholders and the state’s advisory council on amusement ride safety. Under the sponsors’ description, the proposed fee formula would multiply the average inspection time for each ride type by the number of inspectors required and by the Department of Agriculture’s average hourly salary for inspectors, producing categories intended to match inspection effort and complexity.
Committee members asked how categories were determined and whether changes could impose steep costs on some operators. Representative Cockley asked why the bill appeared to eliminate two existing classifications and add five new categories, including family rides, major rides, spectacular rides, tower rides and large roller coasters; sponsors said they would follow up with Legislative Service Commission (LSC) clarification on the bill analysis and categories. Sponsors said the largest fee increases would apply mainly to large theme-park roller coasters, which are generally not operated by small, local vendors.
Representative Miller and others pressed whether the change would raise total program revenue or be revenue neutral. Sponsors said the intent was to realign fees to reflect inspection time and complexity and that the proposal was industry-driven; they said they expected the change to be roughly revenue neutral but that the committee would get a formal fiscal note from LSC.
Members also questioned whether the state currently subsidizes inspections. A sponsor noted that the inspection program has historically received support from the General Assembly (including COVID-era subsidies) and that the proposed formula is intended to better align fees with inspection labor and complexity; sponsors said they believed the proposed fees would more closely cover inspection costs without creating a new general-fund obligation.
No committee vote occurred; sponsors and members requested fiscal and technical clarifications from LSC and the Department of Agriculture before further action.
