Editorials from around Ohio

Recent editorials of statewide and national interest from Ohio newspapers:

Get school funding formula right

The Toledo Blade

Oct. 28

The long-sought goal is in sight of establishing a new K-12 public education funding formula for Ohio to replace the existing model that has been deemed unconstitutional. But it’s essential that Ohio General Assembly get this one right.

The authors of a revised plan, state Reps. Bob Cupp (R., Lima) and John Patterson (D., Jefferson), briefed the General Assembly’s House Finance Committee this month about House Bill 305. It’s another attempt after the original funding revision plan in June was not well received.

The intent is to adopt the school formula as a stand-alone law, rather than incorporate into the biennial budget, a process that is vulnerable to behind-closed-doors shenanigans. Ohio’s more than 600 school districts have long waited for an overhaul of the per-pupil funding formula.

The 1997 ruling from the Ohio Supreme Court found the state’s funding formula unconstitutional because it forced districts to depend heavily on local property taxes, an advantage only in districts with high property values. But the formula has been tweaked, not fundamentally corrected.

The Cupp-Patterson formula seeks to base the funding of schools on the educational services that children need, an ordering of priorities that will require a commitment from the General Assembly to properly fund. The formula is to be based on actual costs of teachers and administration. Also an improvement over current policy is that Cupp-Patterson funds charter school students and Ed Choice scholarships directly, instead of deducting it from the per-pupil funding of the students’ home public schools.

An earlier version of the Cupp-Patterson plan failed to balance the resources of the state more evenly in favor of poor districts. It provided flat funding for the state’s largest and neediest districts, including Toledo, Cleveland, Dayton, and Youngstown. The low test scores earned by the students in these districts is proof that much needs to be done to better finance education in those districts.

One of the 66 Ohio House members signing as co-sponsors of H.B.305 was state Rep. Paula Hicks-Hudson (D., Toledo). She says the question is, “What is the real price tag so that every child is educated to the best of that child’s ability?”

Mr. Cupp and Mr. Patterson call their bill the Fair School Funding Plan. That is yet to be proven. But it’s a start.

Online: https://bit.ly/335MRKY

___

Drug settlements a big win for Summit County

The Akron Beacon Journal

Oct. 26

Money won’t bring back the more than 1,000 local lives lost since 2013. Nor will it immediately ease the pain of addiction in the lives of countless others and their loved ones. It’s way too late for quick fixes.

But the $326.6 million in settlement agreements recently reached in U.S. District Court by Summit and Cuyahoga counties in the so-called bellwether case against the manufacturers and distributors of addictive opioids should make a significant difference.

The defendants continue to deny responsibility for flooding markets with their addictive pills, including 168 million supplied in Summit County alone from 2006 to 2012, according to a Washington Post analysis of DEA data. That’s 44 pills per year for every person living here.

We all know the real truth. A trial would have been devastating for these companies. Their willingness to cut deals speaks volumes about the evidence against them. Perhaps there’s even some awareness of the civic disaster their greed spawned throughout Ohio and beyond.

What’s certain is a settlement will allow people to obtain more help as quickly as possible.

By our math, Summit County’s current share of $326 million in cash and treatment drugs should net roughly $90 million (depending on attorney expenses) with several more defendants still awaiting trials likely to be held in 2020. That figure also does not include original defendant Perdue Pharma, which is working on a national settlement.

Summit County leaders - including local governments - deserve credit for taking some measure of risk two years ago in pursuing this case, which is just one of 2,000 or so such lawsuits filed by state and local governments. They surely never dreamed a federal judge would pick Summit and Cuyahoga to become the test federal case, drawing the attention of national media leading up to Monday’s last-minute settlement.

Now, the question becomes how to best spend these and future proceeds.

Those decisions will appropriately be guided by a new Opioid Abatement Advisory Council to be designated by leaders from the county, city of Akron, the remaining cities and villages, townships and a representative of Summit County Public Health. Members will include representatives from the health care, addiction treatment, mental health, child welfare, education and public safety fields.

This council will face a challenging task to not only pick the best solutions and services to fund for our residents but to also ensure the dollars are never used for unrelated expenses. We also don’t want to see current funding for addiction services shifted in any way to cover other government needs.

Every dollar needs to benefit addicts or anyone else impacted by the opiate epidemic, including first responders on the front line of reviving those who overdose. Educating the public about how addiction is a disease - albeit one that may result from bad decisions - also would be quite helpful.

We’ll all be living with the consequences of this epidemic for years to come. This money must be spent wisely.

Online: https://bit.ly/2JtLqOW

___

Civilian review can help improve Columbus police operations

The Columbus Dispatch

Oct. 26

It should be no surprise that a citizens task force appointed by Mayor Andrew J. Ginther is calling for creation of a civilian review board to look over complaints about the Columbus Division of Police and officers’ use of force.

Nor should police feel overly threatened if the mayor adopts the recommendation, which we think he should, as part of a report he will issue to present and comment on the full work of the Community Safety Advisory Commission he appointed in 2018.

The work of the 17-member commission chaired by former judge and City Attorney Janet Jackson has been slow but thorough, as demonstrated by about 120 separate recommendations it accepted and forwarded to the mayor in a meeting this week. The commission’s patient approach sets a favorable tone for carrying out its proposals going forward.

The advisory commission process appears to have helped open channels of communication between the police division and some who have been especially critical of its operations, including leaders in the black community.

Commission members did not rush their work but took time to study findings of Matrix Consulting Group, a California firm that reviewed and reported on its analysis of Columbus police operations. Matrix found some disparity along racial lines in how police interact with black and white citizens but it also praised the division for having good practice policies, if not consistent implementation in the field.

It also helps that the mayor earlier this year invited local faith leaders, many whose congregations are African American, to offer input on improved race relations for the division - both externally and internally on behalf of black officers. Three clergy members were named to hiring committees, including the search for a new police chief.

The city has been similarly deliberate in its process for choosing a successor to Kim Jacobs, who retired as chief in February. A national search has been conducted after Ginther won an arbitration fight with the Fraternal Order of Police to be able to consider outside candidates. Three dozen candidates are being reviewed for a decision expected by the end of the year or early January.

Open communication and sincere engagement will be critical to improving relations between police and citizens, especially as a new chief attempts to deal with issues including community policing concerns and a disbanded vice unit now reconfigured as the Police and Community Together team.

Wisely, the advisory commission did not attempt to dictate structure or conduct of a civilian review board beyond calling for it to be created within a year of the new chief being hired. As Interim Chief Thomas Quinlan noted, such review bodies take many forms in other cities, with no particular approach considered to be the gold standard.

From our perspective, the best outcomes from any new civilian review of police practices will require committed, engaged citizens who are willing to fully consider the circumstances officers encounter on a daily basis.

Likewise, police must be open to hearing how their conduct is viewed by civilians and be willing to make adjustments, as done in replacing the defective vice unit with a more empathic model aimed at helping to reduce human trafficking.

Quinlan’s analogy is on target: Just as officers must ensure due process for those accused of criminal conduct, any effort to review police actions must give them the same.

Online: https://bit.ly/2q1L2jW

___

Huffman anti-SLAPP bill would be victory for free speech

The Lima News

Oct. 26

Thirty-six states have anti-SLAPP laws. Ohio needs to make it 37.

A big step has been taken in that direction with the introduction of the Ohio Citizen Participation Act by State Senator Matt Huffman, R-Lima. It seeks to ensure that baseless lawsuits cannot be used to stifle discussions of public interest - a process known as SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation).

Anti-SLAPP laws are clearly victories for free speech. They make sure those with deep pockets cannot buy a favorable verdict simply by prolonging cases.

At the same time, an anti-SLAPP law does not change existing laws against libel and slander. It remains illegal for people to intentionally say or publish false things meant to harm someone’s reputation.

Huffman’s Ohio Citizen Participation Act (Senate Bill 215) would set up a process that allows a judge to quickly dismiss a defamation lawsuit if he or she determines it was filed in response to constitutionally protected free speech.

Under current law, a judge’s decision on whether speech is constitutionally protected comes at the end of the case, which can be several years after it is filed. Given that the speech in question is protected under the First Amendment, the defendants often prevail. However, by the time a resolution is reached the defendant will have incurred hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.

The new law would give defendants the right to have a judge decide whether the speech is protected at the beginning of the case, not the end. That could allow cases to be resolved in months rather than years, thereby saving the defendant money and clearing the court’s docket for more worthy cases.

“We have to have public discussion about difficult issues, and somebody needs to do that, whether it’s the newspaper or online or TV or radio. And if those folks are inhibited in some way, it’s doing a disservice to government and a disservice to the Constitution,” the Lima Republican said Tuesday.

A similar bill was introduced by Huffman in in 2017, but failed to make it through the committee review process. The new version drops language aimed at protecting people who make anonymous internet comments, which Huffman believes caused it to lose support.

Huffman’s bill is modeled after the Texas and California laws, which are generally accepted as the best anti-SLAPP laws in the United States. Interestingly, Texas is a traditionally conservative state while California is viewed as a liberal state. The Ohio proposal enjoys that same bipartisan support from a diverse coalition including the ACLU, Americans for Prosperity, the Ohio Association of Broadcasters, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, domestic violence advocacy groups, the motion picture industry, the Ohio News Media Association as well as Senate President Larry Obhof.

Ohio needs an anti-SLAPP law to ensure anyone targeted for exercising their First Amendment rights is protected.

State legislators need to line up behind it and vote it into law.

Online: https://bit.ly/34aHLgR