To amend sections 111.41, 111.42, and 111.99 of the Revised Code to expand the Address Confidentiality Program.
HB396 expands Ohio’s Address Confidentiality Program, which is administered by the Secretary of State and is designed to help people keep their residential and related addresses out of public records. The bill broadens the program’s eligibility and clarifies the application and renewal process for participants who fear for their safety because they are victims of domestic violence, stalking, human trafficking, trafficking in persons, rape, sexual battery, serious violent crime, or a crime involving a deadly weapon threat. It also continues to allow parents or guardians to apply on behalf of minors, incompetent persons, or wards, and it preserves the program’s use of a substitute address for mail and service of process.
The bill requires the Secretary of State to certify eligible applicants within ten business days, assign a unique participant number, issue an authorization card, and provide information about voting, mail forwarding, and real property confidentiality notices. It also sets a four-year certification period, allows renewal, and authorizes the Secretary of State to cancel certification if a participant cannot be reached for 60 days or more. The measure maintains confidentiality protections for addresses and related information and reinforces criminal penalties for unauthorized disclosure of protected information.
In practical terms, HB396 would amend sections 111.41, 111.42, and 111.99 of the Revised Code and repeal the existing versions of those sections. Its effect would be to strengthen and expand the state’s legal framework for protecting the location information of vulnerable individuals, while also imposing clearer duties on public officials and others who handle confidential address data. It also ties the program to related real property confidentiality procedures and law-enforcement access rules.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available voting history is strongly favorable. The bill received a 9-0 favorable passage vote in the House General Government Committee, and there are no recorded committee transcripts showing opposition or debate in the provided materials. That suggests broad support for the bill’s core purpose of increasing privacy and safety protections for victims and other at-risk individuals.
No specific points of contention are documented in the available context. Based on the bill text, any potential concerns would likely center on eligibility standards, the scope of protected offenses, administrative burdens on the Secretary of State, or the confidentiality obligations imposed on public officials and others who access protected information. However, the provided record does not show active disagreement on those issues.
HB396 would amend Ohio Revised Code sections 111.41, 111.42, and 111.99 to expand and clarify the Address Confidentiality Program. It would broaden the categories of victims who may qualify, formalize application and renewal procedures, require the Secretary of State to provide substitute-address services and related notices, and strengthen confidentiality and penalty provisions for unauthorized disclosure of protected address information. The bill would directly affect program participants, application assistants, public officials, and anyone who handles confidential address or real-property confidentiality information.
The available legislative history shows a favorable and noncontroversial reception. The House General Government Committee reported the bill out 9-0, and no committee testimony or recorded debate is provided that indicates opposition. Overall, the bill appears to have been viewed as a protective measure for victims and other vulnerable people, with broad support for expanding privacy safeguards.
No explicit contention is documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of policy concern, based on the text alone, could include the breadth of eligibility for the program, the administrative workload for the Secretary of State, and the criminal penalties for disclosure of confidential information. The bill also requires applicants to make sworn statements and waivers, which could raise questions about verification and liability, but no stakeholder opposition is shown in the record provided.