HOUSE BILL 198 OPPOSITION TESTIMONY OF

Matt Ditchey, Esq, Representative

Angels for Animals, Animal Cruelty Task Force of Ohio, Josephs Legacy, Justice for Herbie, Ohio
Coalition of Dog Advocates, Nitro Foundation/Nitros Ohio Army, Ohio Voters for Companion
Animals, Inc. and Paws and the Law
June 16, 2015 House Judiciary Committee
Good morning Chairman Butler and Members of the House Judiciary Committee.
My name is Matt Ditchey, Esq. and I currently live in Green Township, Ohio (Mahoning County). I am submitting written
testimony on behalf of the following eight grassroots animal welfare organizations: Angels for Animals, Animal Cruelty Task
Force of Ohio, Josephs Legacy, Justice for Herbie, Nitro Foundation/Nitros Ohio Army, Ohio Coalition of Dog Advocates,
Ohio Voters for Companion Animals, Inc. and Paws and the Law as opposed party for Ohio House Bill 198.
Representing over 77,000 constituents across 81 Ohio counties, our eight Ohio-citizen driven, community based
organizations are the driving force behind legislative efforts to address issues impacting the health and safety of companion
animals as defined under Ohio Revised Code 959. Our supporters include a diverse section of voters and taxpayers from
across the state, including but not limited to, a broad range of dog enthusiasts, veterinarians, breeders, animal care and
welfare organizations, animal control representatives, appointed humane agents, judges, attorneys, and government
employees who understand state and federal governance.
Given our coalitions dedication to educate and support the law enforcement and judicial communities in the enforcement
and administration of Ohio's animal welfare laws, I want to begin my testimony by thanking Representative Hambleys
leadership in addressing criminal prosecution authority as a component within this important piece of legislation for Ohioans.
Our coalition strongly agrees that the first step in the successful criminal prosecution of crimes related to animal cruelty
begins with the governance of Ohio Revised Code. However, our supporters have expressed concerns that HB 198 will
weaken the current provisions under 2931.18 which allows a humane society or its agent to employ an attorney to prosecute
violations of law relating to the prevention of cruelty to animals. Their greatest concerns include the following:
1.The proposed legislation repeals the statute authorizing a humane society or its agent to employ an
attorney and to also employ one or more assistant attorneys to prosecute violations of law relating to
prevention of cruelty to animals.
Recommendation: Retain the original language under 2931.18. A unique aspect of prosecuting animal
cruelty cases is that the evidence includes living creatures that require daily care. We firmly believe having
the ability to appoint a special prosecutor allows humane societies to work with an experienced specialist in
animal statutes, case law and veterinary reporting. This specialist is able to prioritize animal cruelty and
neglect cases and expeditiously establish custody of animals that cannot humanely be held in a cage while
waiting for their day in our hard-working, but heavily burdened court system.
2.The proposed legislation seeks to move the oversight of special prosecutors employed by humane societies
perceived to be without any accountability to either a county prosecutor or municipal law director.
Recommendation: Retain the original language under 2931.18 and consider alternative language which
would appoint a probate judge to review all pre-prosecution agreements prior to execution by the courts. (It
is important to note the records involving all of a humane society's resolved criminal cases are available to
any Ohioan who requests them under the Ohio Sunshine Laws.)
Our eight groups and their supporters firmly believe that changes to 2931.18 under House Bill 198 will remove an important
tool for humane societies to successfully prosecute animal cruelty cases. Most importantly, we believe the proposed
abolition of humane societies authority to employ an attorney could create scenarios for cases of egregious violations under
959.131(B) to fall by the wayside for already overworked elected and appointed prosecutors. This is of special concern
given that a recent report released by the Animal Legal Defense Fund has shown Ohio has not yet evolved to placing a
greater emphasis on animal welfare in the intervening decades when compared to other states in the Midwest.
It is our hope this Committee will reflect on the opinions expressed by our eight groups and their supporters in todays
testimony prior to recommending Ohio House Bill 198 for review and passage by the House Judiciary Committee.
As the representative for Angels for Animals, Animal Cruelty Task Force of Ohio, Josephs Legacy, Justice for Herbie, Nitro
Foundation/Nitros Ohio Army, Ohio Coalition of Dog Advocates, Ohio Voters for Companion Animals, Inc. and Paws and the

HOUSE BILL 198 OPPOSITION TESTIMONY OF

Matt Ditchey, Esq, Representative
Angels for Animals, Animal Cruelty Task Force of Ohio, Josephs Legacy, Justice for Herbie, Ohio
Coalition of Dog Advocates, Nitro Foundation/Nitros Ohio Army, Ohio Voters for Companion
Animals, Inc. and Paws and the Law
June 16, 2015 House Judiciary Committee
Law, I greatly appreciate your time and consideration on this important piece of legislation for Ohioans, and I welcome any
questions you may have.