(bright music) - [Mike] A move to strip the state school board of its power has advanced in Columbus.

Lawmakers are also looking at more strict voting rules, and Akron Public Schools is pursuing a plan to install metal detectors at middle and high schools after a student had a gun in school.

Ideas is next.

(bright music continues) Hello and welcome to Ideas.

I'm Mike McIntyre.

Thanks so much for joining us.

The Ohio Senate has passed a bill stripping the state school board of most of its duties and moving education policy making to a new department under control of the governor.

The House will now consider it.

That's one of many measures being discussed in Columbus during the lame-duck session.

Also in play, a proposal to require photo IDs to vote.

Akron Public Schools will look to install metal detectors in middle and high schools after a seventh grader had a gun inside a fanny pack at school.

And the Metro Health Board has authorized an independent auditor to look into how bonuses to former CEO, Akram Boutros, bonuses the board says were improper, went undetected.

We'll talk about that, and the rest of the week's news on the reporter's round table.

Joining me this week from Idea Stream Public Media, education reporter Conor Morris, and health reporter Taylor Wizner.

And in Columbus, Andy Chow, news editor for the Ohio Public Radio and Television State House News Bureau.

Let's get ready to round table.

The Ohio Senate passed a bill Wednesday that would take away most of the responsibilities of the State Board of Education, moving those responsibilities to a new Department of Education and workforce under the Governor's office.

Andy, as we discussed previously, governors want this.

No surprise, Mike DeWine, is a big proponent of this change.

- That's right.

And the thing that's really interesting about this bill is that this has been discussed for years and years and years.

Many governors, many other legislatures in the past have tried to push this forward.

At one point it seemed like a really big swing that would never actually pass.

This time around, it seems like it really might have a good chance of becoming law by the end of the year.

- Would it have as good a chance in the House as in the Senate?

- It's not necessarily if it has enough support in the House.

I think the big question is, is there enough time?

Right now, House Speaker, Bob Cupp, has made it very clear that he wants to end session by the end of next week.

Does that give members of the House enough time to look over what's a very large piece of legislation?

I think it spans nearly 2000 pages, in that amount of time.

So I think there are plenty of Republicans, and even some Democrats maybe, in the House who might support a bill like this.

But is there enough time to give it as much consideration as they think is worthy of it.

- So they read the legislation before they pass it.

It's a little different than on the federal level, I guess.

- So they say.

So, yeah.

- What's interesting here is you just mentioned this is historical, that previous governors have wanted this, that there have been attempts in the past, but it just hasn't gotten traction.

And there are a lot of people that are looking at this and saying, this is actually an answer to something that's going on in the current culture, the culture wars that are happening in education policy.

All the things we saw last year about critical race theory and transgender students, that this is a response to that.

So is there an element of that, or is this, and is that maybe something that's driving the possible approval of this where it hasn't been in the past?

- I don't know if it's necessarily the driving force behind it, but I think it definitely is an element, it is a factor that's playing into all of this.

When you talk to people, whether it's Republicans or Democrats, when they consider the idea of shifting the responsibility over to the governor's office with the legislature having a say in who they can confirm as the appointee of that director position, there is a thought that, well, maybe this can avoid some of these ideological arguments that have taken up a lot of the State Board of Education's time over the past couple of years.

Now, the problem is with, the controversial piece when it comes to whether Democrats support this or not is before the election, the board sort of shifted more towards conservative-leaning members of the board.

And then after the election, more union backed, more liberal-leaning people who are considered Democrats won their races in the State Board of Education.

So there was a belief that the political dynamic might shift more liberal in the next two years for the State Board of Education.

But there is an overall thought that maybe if you do take that power away, put it in the governor's office, maybe you do avoid some of these little, not little, but some of these fights that have been happening over the past couple of years.

- That timing does seem curious that if the, now you have more Democrats on the board or more people that are liberal-leaning, and you have a very conservative legislature, a conservative governor, and suddenly, okay, well then let's take that power away.

And there are a lot of people that are asking questions about that.

We have a email from listener Susan who says, "When is it good to consolidate power to the governor who doesn't have the expertise in education that the members of the school board have?"

It's another great point.

(theme music) The superintendent of Akron Public Schools said she wants the district to install metal detectors in middle and high school buildings after two buildings were locked down this week because a seventh grader had a gun in school.

Conor, the district says it'll need fixed metal detectors and the request is expected to go before the Akron School Board next week.

You did a little looking into, and I know you're still working on that, does it make it safer to have fixed metal detectors at the front of a school?

- Yeah, so currently they have, what they call portable metal detectors so they can kind of wheel 'em around from one school to another.

Metal detector wands as well.

But they're saying that these new metal detectors will be like a, kind of the latest technology along with some bag search technology.

So it's gonna be a lot more akin to like airport TSA checks.

And in the meantime they're doing kind of more mandatory checks and wanding of students, which does add time to the students, I mean, it can potentially add time to the students' days.

I mean, they're saying they don't want to, you know, make it this long line.

They don't want it to take an hour to get students into school.

So there is a bit of a trade off there.

And unfortunately there's really not that much research yet on if metal detectors really add that much to safety of schools.

I mean you'll see school shootings that have happened in the past, and some of these schools do have metal detectors, you know?

So there's other issues at play.

Sometimes there are doors that are unlocked or a door that's propped open, you know?

And some of the research that is out there doesn't necessarily back up that these metal detectors make schools all that much safer.

- I imagine though, if you have a student found in a school with a gun, your first reaction is, "We've gotta find ways to make that not happen."

- [Conor] Sure.

- And a metal detector seems to be one.

- Part of this is optics too.

School districts and across the country have moved to, you know, add metal detectors in the wake of school shootings.

We need to be careful though.

This is a difficult conversation at times because there is kind of the internal safety aspect of this, and then there's the external safety aspect of this.

So there's the idea that you wanna prevent school shooters from coming in, but then there's also really significant student behavioral issues that have really gotten worse after them and during the, during the pandemic and after the pandemic-related school closures.

So schools across the country and in Akron, especially, have seen student misbehavior issues really skyrocket.

Part of that's due to, you know, yes, some of these students didn't really have the structure of school for a year or so.

But also, too, these students are dealing with a lot, especially in inner city schools.

You see this in Cleveland as well.

I mean, 10% of students in Akron are considered homeless and you gotta consider what they're dealing with at home.

There's a lot that comes with living in poverty and so there's a lot of stress that these kids are under.

And teachers, from what I understand, they understand that.

But I think some folks have come to a breaking point, you know, in that regard.

- Is there a discussion then that what's needed is attention to that, mental health services, rather than the hardening of the entrance to the school in which we would yield better, even more?

- I think an interesting point, the teachers union and the school administration, well they might not, you know, it might not seem like they're seeing eye to eye on that right now.

I do think that you'll hear both of them say that it needs to be both.

That, you know, the metal detectors will help and that it is a good use of money, but also that there needs to be further bolstered support for student mental health.

The district will tell you too that they do have a counselor in each school now, they have a significant number of school psychologists, and they have been really trying to beef up the external security with regard to there's like more cameras and improve locks and doors.

But also trying to staff up as well.

So administrators that are focusing on school security, but also on student mental health.

- What kind of money are we talking about to put metal detectors in all the schools?

- Yeah, it's not clear just yet.

I think they're still going through kind of the analysis, but it's gonna be several million dollars to be sure for the metal detectors alone.

So we're gonna see that during the school board meeting on Monday nights next week, likely, as a proposal that goes before the board.

(theme music) - The Metro Health Board has authorized an independent auditor to look into how bonuses to former CEO Akram Boutros, bonuses the board says were improper, went undetected.

And the county says it'll tighten oversight of Metro Health by parsing out its public subsidy more slowly.

Taylor, an independent auditor may provide answers to a question I've heard since this story broke.

How could this happen?

How could the board not know about that much money in bonuses?

- Yeah, Mike, that's a great overview of where we're at with things.

And I think, you know, that's the question that's on everyone's mind is how did this happen?

How did they not know about it sooner?

You know, those bonuses started over a four year period starting in 2018.

So there's a lot of questions that we're trying to get answers to.

So Dr. Airica Steed, you know, is sort of now at the center of things.

She just started this month here in December.

So she's come before the county.

She's, you know, working with this law firm, Tucker Ellis, and she's now authorized this auditor to come in, this audit firm, and really take a look at things.

They've already done an investigation with this law firm to look at, you know, were these bonuses authorized?

Were they, was the board aware of them?

And so they looked into that, but I think this will take it that step further and figure out how this could have been missed.

- Yeah, the Tucker Ellis investigation is what prompted all of this.

Interestingly, Tucker Ellis will be in charge of selecting the external auditor who will be looking at this so that the board can't be seen as having some sort of a, meaning to do this is, it's not influenced by the auditor.

They didn't pick their own person because this is in dispute now, and it's in legal dispute.

But one of the things that Airica Steed, Dr. Airica Steed said is that, "The report will help to put to bed some of the unfortunate conjecture about the actions and motives of Metro Health Board members and employees."

So clearly it's specifically that those questions have been asked about the board.

her hope is that this audit will put to bed any of those kinds of questions.

- Yeah, I mean I can, I think there's two sides to that.

I think there's Dr. Boutros' claims that this is retaliation and so, you know, I think they think that maybe an audit will clarify, you know, whether that may be the case.

And I think there's also questions of, you know, were board members possibly involved in this or what, you know, who else besides Dr. Boutros may have been aware of these bonuses?

So, you know, having that external evaluation, that I think the board wants to get as far away from as possible to really give some complete answers, is what they're looking for.

- And specifically that that information from that audit would be given to the public and to the county officials at the same time.

- [Taylor] Yes.

- Trustees chairwoman, Vanessa Whiting, says, "Two major changes have been made already.

The CEO's annual bonus must now be subject of a separate board resolution.

It'll be audited to assure compliance with all compensation policies and requirements."

And consultants, compensation consultants, who have been hired and who are supposed to know what's going on here, apparently, just take the word of the CEO on what the compensation is.

Now they're going to have to check it out with human resources.

- Yeah, that's a bit of an oddity, right?

You would think that consultants would be engaging with human resources.

- [Mike] Yeah.

- When they're determining, you know, executive pay, which I think comes up when contracts end and those negotiations start again.

So they bring in these consultants who kind of help them get a idea of the real estate of what executives should be making, what they're making in other parts of the country in similar markets.

So they come in, they do that assessments.

And what the board is saying is that they all just took the word of the CEOs when conducting that analysis.

And so I think there's questions there of, you know, with what's going on with HR?

Why were they not more involved in those those talks.

(theme music) - Ohio House and Senate lawmakers wanna make changes to election rules, including a requirement that all voters have a photo ID.

Andy back to the lame-duck.

Let's talk a little bit.

If we tried to get in everything lawmakers are discussing, we would be here for hours.

A lot of it won't get done this session anyway, but some major legislation will be passed.

Let's cover some high profile bills on where they stand, starting with changes to Ohio elections and voting requirements.

There are multiple bills on voting and election changes being considered in both the House and the Senate.

One change that appears likely to pass is that a photo ID will be required to cast ballots.

- So what happens here, and here's another term that you hear a lot during lame-duck is, what vehicle is gonna be used moving forward?

So you have competing bills, one in the House, one in the Senate, that change different laws, different rules surrounding elections.

The photo ID bill, the photo ID language, is currently sitting in the House in a bill that would make different changes to election laws.

The House is considering its own bill that would make different changes to election laws.

There are different provisions in each bills.

And so the question becomes, what are things in the Senate bill that the House likes?

What are things in the House bill that the Senate likes?

There does seem to be a little bit of friction when it comes to the voter ID language.

So is there enough support for that provision to move through?

That's a big question mark.

There are lots of other different things that we can talk about too, where it seems to be that there are opponents on either side.

Now, and when we talk about this, there's the House, there's the Senate, but we're really talking about Republicans because they have the super majority.

There are the Democrats who are opposing most of these changes.

But as of right now, they don't have enough votes to really sway the opinion one way or the other.

- Other change being discussed, it's ending the 10 day grace period for absentee ballots to arrive at the Board of elections to be counted.

So generally now it's 10 days after the election, as long as it came in during that time will count the ballot.

Now they're saying it's gotta be in basically when the polls close.

What's the motivation behind that?

What's the objection to it?

- So this is one of those items that's currently sitting in the Senate and the Senate has added it to one bill, and we're yet to hear from the house what they think of it.

This would be a very controversial provision, especially when you think about how long Ohio has done mail-in absentee voting.

And most voters know that as long as it's postmarked on the day of the election that they're able to get it in.

If that ballot does not come in within the 10 days, then it's not counted.

That's what the grace period is for, to not have that as gonna be a major disruption to the system according to voter rights organizations and community organizations.

And that is one of the more controversial provisions that I'm not sure has a lot of support widely among Republicans in the legislature.

- Anybody who's been waiting for a piece of mail knows that sometimes the US Postal Service does a great job, and sometimes it takes a few extra days.

So there is that issue involved too, which is just whether a mail carrier can get something to someone in that short amount of time.

- Well, and the other interesting thing is, this new provision about the 10 day grace period is sort of connected with another issue that's not so controversial, which is changing the deadline for which you can request an absentee ballot.

So right now you have until three days before the election to send out your request for an absentee ballot.

Democrats, Republicans, everybody say, even though that's the state law, you should not wait that long because you're not gonna be able to get your ballot back in time to then send it in for election day.

So lawmakers are looking at changing that law to be either 7 or 10 days before the election day to make state law reflect reality when it comes to the postal service.

So that is a less controversial measure.

This 10 day grace period for absentee ballots to be received by the boards of elections sort of uses the same argument, but then goes in the different direction and becomes way more controversial.

- All right, let's moving right along here.

The push to make it harder to pass constitutional amendments was to be voted on in a committee yesterday.

Jo Ingles reported that vote didn't happen.

So what went on there?

- Well, that's a big shock too, because what we have been hearing from legislators in the Senate and the House is that this is something that's very important to them and they really want to pass it now so they can ensure that it gets on the May primary ballot.

This resolution would change the threshold for passing a constitutional amendment so that it would need to get 60% or three fifths majority of the vote in order to amend the constitution.

Republicans have been calling for this, Secretary of State, Frank LaRose, has been calling for it.

It was on the fast track, it was supposed to get a vote out of committee and it did not.

The fact that it didn't get a vote out of committee means that you have to have at least one more committee meeting to hold hearings, to hear both sides of things, and then pass it out, and then get it onto the House floor.

So the question is, is there enough time?

And right now with so many other things going on, you start to see legislators triage and prioritize what's gonna happen, what's not gonna happen.

The fact that it didn't get a vote out might indicate that maybe they're gonna just hit pause on this resolution and take it up at the very beginning of next year, still within the window of time to still get it on the May ballot.

- Another issue, lawmakers are looking to make it easier for companies to use the process of fracking under state-owned land and parks.

Fracking is the name used for injecting highly pressured liquid into rocky formations underground extracting oil and gas.

It's very controversial in Ohio, but now we're talking about opening up more public land for that.

- Yeah, this is a tough provision to really wrap your head around because it really changes one or two words in current state law, changing the "may" to a "shall."

And people who follow state law will know that a "shall" is more of a requirement.

It says state agencies "must" allow for leasing on under state public lands to oil and gas companies.

So this is being seen by environmental groups as almost an automatic approval of leasing land to oil and gas companies.

Now, Senate president, Matt Huffman, has indicated that there's more language in there to say that the oil and gas company has to be qualified, but if those are the only provisions, then it really does seem like a rubber stamp for qualified oil and gas companies to come in, apply for release, and frack underneath state public lands.

Again, that's in a bill, that's in a vehicle, that could pass quickly next week without much more committee hearings on it.

- One other thing about energy and that is natural gas, it's a fossil fuel.

But lawmakers are labeling that a green energy, which I normally would think of as, you know, wind, solar, those types of things.

But a fossil fuel has green energy?

- Yeah.

This caught a lot of people by surprise too.

And this is one of those issues where when it comes up out of nowhere, you have to be scratching your head wondering, where is this coming from and what does this actually mean?

When we talked to Huffman about that, he said, well, this opens the door to the oil and gas industry to come in here to feel welcomed by Ohio and to start drilling, start developing, and pump more money into the economy that way.

So we're gonna keep an eye on it to see, well what does it really mean for the industry when a state designates your resource as a green energy?

Republican legislators did receive some pushback on what you just mentioned, Mike, that it is a fossil fuel still.

And Huffman's argument back was that, well, it is much less carbon that's emitted than coal.

So they are considering it a green energy.

- It must be tough, Andy, because you're looking at bills as they come through, but not everything is labeled, "Hey, by the way, this is the natural gas bill."

I think that was stuck in a poultry bill or something.

But the go-to move during lame-duck is to slam things into other pieces of the legislation.

Some of 'em are what we called "Christmas Tree Bills," where there's just a bunch of different stuff, or there's something that's supposed to be about poultry, but suddenly now it's about natural gas.

How do you keep up with all that?

- You don't see the sunlight for a couple days.

No, we walk the hallways, we talk to different lawmakers, and we try to keep our ear to the ground as much as possible because that's exactly what happens at this time where, yes, a bill that maybe started as just reducing restrictions on how many chickens you can buy when they're chicks, turns into a bill that allows for oil and gas fracking under state land, or at least speeds up the process.

(theme music) - Should Ohio have a state cookie?

Third graders in Cincinnati started an effort to name the sugar cookie, the official Ohio cookie.

Let's grab a glass of milk and talk about it.

The idea came from Cincinnati third graders who wondered why Ohio didn't have a state cookie.

I think only a couple states do.

I think Massachusetts has the traditional chocolate chip cookie.

There's a state cookie in New Mexico too.

You know, this is pressing stuff, Andy.

Like students came up with the sugar cookie, arguing it's a generic cookie that could represent a diversity of cookies.

Sounds like a class full of future politicians.

I say if we can classify a snickerdoodle a sugar cookie, I'm all in favor, and the kids say we can.

So that would qualify.

But this is important stuff, Andy, should we have a state cookie and should it be the sugar cookie?

- Well, this is always how Ohio gets its official state "whatevers," is through some sort of class project.

I think we had an official state amphibian come from a class project a couple years ago.

And so, believe it or not.

- [Mike] Wait, what is, do you know what the state amphibian is?

- I can't.

I wish you.

- [Mike] You brought it up.

- I was thinking it's like the Black-Toed Newt, or something like that.

- [Mike] Lee, can you look it up while we're?

Yeah, she's got her hands up.

She's looking.

Go ahead, sorry.

- No, the greatest thing about this is, we joked about that it was controversial, and now we're wondering if it is controversial.

I'm trying to like track down some sources that say that the language that it's written, it says the main ingredients is sugar, flour, butter, eggs, and vanilla.

But what if a company doesn't use those ingredients to make it sugar cookie?

So standby, there might be some controversy coming up.

- Here's my take.

All cookies are sugar cookies.

If you give me a cookie that has no sugar, I don't want that cookie, right?

They all have sugar.

- [Andy] Yeah.

I was saying that's like saying your favorite taco is tortilla.

(laughing) - Alright, so Conor, your take?

- Yeah, I was gonna say Andy, if you're looking for somebody who opposes it, look no farther.

You know, sugar cookie, just boring.

I'm sorry.

- [Mike] Too plain.

- This is the only time that I can actually express my full opinion here.

But, you know, it's just much respect to the kids.

I love the concept behind it, of course.

But you gotta do something a little more exciting than a sugar cookie, I mean.

- [Mike] So what's more exciting?

- I mean, gosh, like, you know, everyone loves chocolate chip, of course.

I think Taylor is a big fan of chocolate chip.

- Yeah, we were talking beforehand.

I'm a purist.

You gotta go with the chocolate chip cookie for Christmas.

- But, you know, you could like mirror the Buckeye.

You know, how about like peanut butter with chocolate chips?

You know?

I feel like I see like no-bake cookies a lot in Ohio too.

I don't know if it's like a Midwestern thing, but.

- [Mike] Like the seven layer, like those kinds of things?

- Like the, it's like oatmeal with like chocolate and peanut butter, like mixed together, and then you just kind of like, it gets set, you know?

- I was gonna say, what about the oatmeal cookie?

What about the oatmeal raisin also a big.

(Andy and Conor groaning) Ooh, ooh, that's controversial.

- [Conor] No We should have nominated that because then we would have a debate.

- [Conor] Yeah.

- I wonder if you can feed an oatmeal raisin cookie to a spotted salamander.

Could you?

- [Andy] Is that what it is?

- It is.

It's the spotted salamander.

- Mike, I'm sorry to say, that salamander will die.

(laughing) - Don't do that.

(theme music) Monday on The Sound of Ideas on WKSU, we'll discuss a new study from Duke University arguing that paying reparations to African-Americans would narrow the life expectancy gap and improve other health outcomes.

I'm Mike McIntyre.

Thank you so much for watching, and stay safe.

(bright music)