Complaints about parties return near OSU campus
The parking lot behind the house on Indianola Avenue near the Ohio State University campus was littered with scores of red Solo cups, a reminder of the party that the residents of the house had thrown the night before.
Classes have started. Everyone’s back, and already the partying is in mid-season form. The weather’s warm, the beer cold.
Columbus police shut down the party about 12:30 a.m. Wednesday after receiving a noise complaint, said Ryan Scott, one of the residents of the house where the party was held. He said about 100 people attended the party.
When told that some nearby homeowners have concerns about party noise, Scott, a 21-year-old senior from New Jersey, replied: “They can move out to UA (Upper Arlington).”
One of his roommates, who gave his name only as Ben, 21, a senior also from New Jersey, added, “If you want to go to sleep, wear earplugs.”
Asked what should be done about
Lawsuit appealed to Ohio Supreme Court
The benefits have been the subject of a lawsuit brought by former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann to reinstate them.
“These are not pawns on a political chessboard,” Dann said of Ohioans seeking benefits. “This involved 200,000 people who are struggling every day to solve the kinds of problems that all of us have to solve.”
Holbrook initially ruled that Dewine had the power to halt those payments. On Aug. 24, the Ogio 10th District Court of Appeals in Columbus ruled Dewine didn’t have the authority to cut off the benefits.
The appeals court also asked Holbrook to consider two additional factors: unjustifiable harm to third parties or any public interest served by restoring the benefits.
Holbrook set a hearing on those topics. In the meantime, the state appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.
Ohio Solicitor General Benjamin Flowers wrote to the top court: “There is no point in letting it percolate any longer before the lower courts: the court can put this important issue to rest, giving the state, would-be beneficiaries, and employers certainty as to the scope of their rights and duties.”
Who benefits or is hurt by the extra payments?
Despite the possibility of the Ohio Supreme Court weighing in, Holbrook listened to testimony about possible harm to third parties and the public interest served by these pandemic unemployment benefits for much of Friday.
Who might be harmed if benefits were restored? Johnson Brothers Rubber Co. President Ken Bostic said he was struggling to hire employees starting at $14 an hour. The 25 vacancies at his business are threatening his ability to serve customers and keep his business in Ohio.
“Right now, I’m waiting on a Mexican temp service agency to be honest with you to see if they can help me,” Bostic said. “If they can’t help me, the first of September, I’m just going to start telling people I can’t service them.”
Who would be helped? Three Ohioans shared their struggles with losing $300 in weekly benefits. They had used that money to pay rent, utilities and child care.
Sebastian Nash of Dublin, Ohio, said he’s applied to more than 40 jobs since June 1 but has received no job offers. Without the additional $300 in benefits, Nash said he receives $159 each week from unemployment.
“It’s been difficult to move forward when I’m concerned financially,” Nash said.
Zach Schiller, research director with liberal think tank Policy Matters Ohio, testified that businesses would actually benefit because Ohioans receiving benefits would spend them immediately in their local economies.
Experts argued whether cutting off businesses led more Ohioans to return to work. Schiller said Ohioans have not returned to work because of a variety of reasons, including concerns about their health amid a continuing pandemic and a lack of child care.
“There is not harm to Ohio employers for the benefit to be reinstated,” testified Andrew Stettner, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank. He said that halting the additional $300 in benefits did not lead to a surge of Ohioans returning to work.
Michael Strain, an economist with the American Enterprise Institute, argued the opposite, saying that generous unemployment benefits would keep Ohioans from returning to work. The full effect of ending the $300 in weekly unemployment benefits early could take several months to see in economic data.
“Unemployment compensation benefits that are higher than what is necessary harm the economy,” Assistant Ohio Attorney General Julie Pfeiffer said. “That is not in the public interest.”
Jessie Balmert is a reporter for the USA TODAY Network Ohio Bureau, which serves the Akron Beacon Journal, Cincinnati Enquirer, Columbus Dispatch and 18 other affiliated news organizations across Ohio.