Proponent Testimony on Senate Bill 112 — Timothy J. Cassell (Ohio Childhood Safety Act)

Summary

Written proponent testimony on SB 112, The Ohio Childhood Safety Act, submitted by Timothy J. Cassell. The testimony says the main function of SB 112 is an annual inspection of doors and hardware for proper functionality, that it requires hardware to be repaired or replaced with like functioning hardware within 18 months of the reported issue, and that it is not a rip and replace bill. It says that, after an interested party meeting, language was added clarifying that existing hardware and doors would be inspected for compliance to the code in existence when originally installed, and that civil penalties have been removed from the bill. It urges the House Commerce and Labor Committee to refer the bill to the full house for passage.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Proponent Testimony
Senate Bill 112
The Ohio Childhood Safety Act

Chairmen Johnson, Vice Chair Manchester, and Ranking Member
McNally, thank you for the Opportunity to Testify today on SB
112 The Ohio Childhood Safety Act. My name it Timothy J.
Cassell and I wanted to provide written proponent testimony.
Some of you know me for my work on behalf of Community
Schools or from my time serving in the House. However you may
not know I was a carpenter prior to my election to State
Representative and one of my many skillsets was door hardware
installation. I have installed thousands of doors and hardware in
my 15 years in the trade. I’m here today because I believe this bill
is very important and deserves your attention and passage.

I want to thank Senator Rulli for bringing this legislation forward
and to give you an Idea of how important this legislation is. I am
going to take you back in time lets step back 116 years to March
4, 1908 location Collinwood Ohio to one of the most tragic
stories in Ohio’s History. On that solemn day 172 elementary
children, two teachers and one rescuer lost their lives in the
Lakewood Elementary School re. Now many are under the
impression that it was because of doors that didn’t open outward
but actually that was not the issue the doors did in fact open out
however they did not open as they should have because one was
not unlocked and the others had faulty hardware that was difficult
to operate and once pressure was but against the door the
hardware completely failed to operate. In the aftermath the
children were found piled against the nonfunctioning doors. This
tragedy did bring about some much needed changes in building
codes for not only schools but all commercial buildings.

Now lets get to the heart of SB 112 the main function is an
annual inspection of doors and hardware for proper functionality.
Even with the changes to code and modern building codes



                     fi
hardware does require some minimal maintenance and
inspection to guarantee proper function. Its been my experience
that in most cases small adjustments like tightening hinge screws
and hardware fasteners will solve most issues. In some cases the
hinges may need shimmed to realign the door properly or the
door closer may need balanced all of which should only take ten
to twenty minutes. This is really preventative maintenance and if
kept up hardware and doors can last several decades. I believe
this bill can actually be seen as a cost saving measure over time
as an annual inspection will point out issues that can be
addressed before actual replacement is needed. SB 112 does
not require hardware to be updated to current code but rather
repaired or replaced with like functioning hardware within 18
months of the reported issue. SB 112 is not a rip and replace bill
that will be costly but rather a common sense approach to
insuring our children are in safe and secure buildings. The
thought behind SB112 was not to create a costly burden to
schools but rather to provide much needed enhancement to
safety and security in all our schools.

SB 112 as originally drafted contained a ne associated with
noncompliance and vague language as to older existing
hardware. After an interested party meeting it was decided to
add language that clari ed that existing hardware and doors
would be inspected for compliance to the code that was in
existence when the door and hardware was originally installed.
There was a further discussion on the necessity of a civil penalty
and Im happy to say that civil penalties have been removed from
the bill. I strongly urge the House Commerce and Labor
Committee refer the bill to the full house for passage.



Respectfully Submitted
Timothy J. Cassell




                               fi
             fi


File and source

File

2024-06-18_commerce-labor_testimony_testimony-12412.pdf

Size

22,272 bytes

SHA-256

2b011842c16944e48de6e1486c5308f3038c89f19fc16fc0adfc3c8604f6ae81

Our copy

2024-06-18_commerce-labor_testimony_testimony-12412.pdf

Original

No public link identified.