March 10, 2026 · Education Committee · 16,615 words · 18 speakers · 196 segments
The House Education Committee will please come to order. Thank you to whoever turned the air conditioning on. It's much appreciated. Please keep it running. And we would like to begin today, as usual, with an opening invocation. And the chair recognizes Representative Newman
to offer the opening prayer. Let's pray. Father, we bow before you again today to give you thanks and praise. You are the Lord God, and you have chosen to reveal yourself to us and to give wisdom and grace and help in all kinds of times of need. Lord, we find ourselves again today in time of need of your help and strength and wisdom as we consider the things that are good for the state of Ohio. And so, Lord, I pray now that you'll help us to listen well, to speak well, to ask well, and to decide well for what is good and right and pleasing to you and to our neighbors. I pray this in the name of Jesus. Amen.
Thank you, Representative. The chair recognizes Representative Click to lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Representative.
Will the clerk please call the roll? Chair Fowler-Arthur?
I'm here.
I'm here.
Vice Chair Odioso? Here. Ranking Member Brennan? Here. Representative Byrd? Here. Representative Click? Representative Deane? Here. Representative Manning? Here. Representative Miller? Here. Representative Newman? Here. Representative Pickle Antonio checked in? Representative Ritter checked in? Representative Robinson? Representative Thomas? Here.
We have a quorum present and will proceed as a full committee. Members, if you would please review the minutes from the March 3rd committee meeting and mute any devices at this time. Thank you. Are there any objections to the to the minutes? Hearing none the minutes are approved. Just as a reminder to our guests and members if you would please fill out the photo or video form up by the witness stand prior to taking any pictures or recordings These must be signed by the chair prior to the media being taken in accordance with House and committee rules. First, I'd like to call up House Bill 125 for its sixth hearing, and I'm going to recognize Vice Chair Odioso for a motion.
I move to favorably report House Bill 125 and recommend it for passage.
Thank you. Are there any questions from committee members? Hearing none, will the clerk please call the roll on House Bill 125? Chair Fowler-Arthur?
Yes.
Vice Chair Odioso?
Yes.
Ranking Member Brennan?
Yes.
Representative Byrd.
Yes.
Representative Click.
Yes.
Representative Deane.
Yes.
Representative Manning.
Yes.
Representative Miller.
Yes.
Representative Newman.
Yes.
Representative Robinson.
Yes.
Representative Thomas.
Yes.
With 10 affirmative votes and zero negative votes the bill is favorably reported out of committee as amended and we will be leaving the roll open for several members that had to be in other committees until 5 p Those of you who are here please try to sign the roll before you leave the room today This will conclude the sixth hearing of House Bill 125. Next, I would like to call up Senate Bill 19 for its third hearing. and I recognize Vice Chair Odioso for a motion.
I move to adopt AM1882.
Thank you. The amendment is in order. Would you please explain the amendment?
This amendment updates out-of-date revised code sections in the bill.
Thank you. Are there any objections to the amendment? Hearing none, the amendment becomes part of the bill. I would now like to invite Kevin Dalton to offer opponent testimony. Is Mr. Dalton with us in the room? Welcome to committee, sir. Welcome to committee. You'll have five minutes and we begin when you're ready.
All right, well, good afternoon. My name's Kevin Dalton, president of Toledo Federation of Teachers, and also serve with the Ohio Federation of Teachers Executive Committee. Chair, follow-up, author, vice-chair, odioso, ranking member, Brendan, and members of the House Education Committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide opposition testimony in Senate Bill 19. The Ohio Federation of Teachers, along with Toledo Federation of Teachers, represents teachers throughout Ohio, traditional and in charter schools, support staff, higher education faculty, staff, library employees, and social workers. We share the goal of improving both math and English language arts achievement in Ohio students. Strong skills in these subjects are essential to students' long-term success, and educators across the state are already working hard to develop students grow academically and socially. However, the approach outlined in this legislation raises serious concerns. As written, the bill would place significant new unfunded mandates on schools and time constraints while also increasing the risk of over-identifying students for intervention based on unlimited measures. For these reasons, we oppose the bill in its current form. The bill creates new mandates for schools and districts without clearly providing the resources needed to carry them out with fidelity. Requirements for intervention services and additional improvement and monitoring plans to what is already mandated by state law will require significant time above and beyond what educators are able to provide now. Teachers are already facing large class sizes, increased bureaucracy, and staffing cuts throughout the state in districts like Toledo and other districts represented by OFT. With the state falling short of fully funding public education, districts are already being faced to make difficult decisions about how to stretch the limited resources. Adding extensive new responsibilities above and beyond what we're currently doing without the dedicated funding will make it even more difficult for educators to focus on the crucial work of teaching students. With Senate Bill 19, adding a math improvement plan for students is additional time it takes away from the instruction of students. I'm going a little bit off my written testimony, as you already have, but as a first-grade teacher for 17 years and providing education through students K-8, what we find in the classroom is mandates like this, albeit with good intentions, it takes away from the opportunity that we have during the day to provide the one-on-one instruction and relationship development with our students in order to increase academic progress. One of the issues. The current version of the bill also identifies students for intervention based on a single test score As written students who score limited on a state assessment ELA or math score below grade level on a diagnostic assessment automatically qualify for intervention services Having that type of intervention identifier based off of one day, one test, is not the best for students. This means students would be identified based on the results of that one test, like I just stated. Offering only a snapshot rather than a full picture of the student's abilities in the subject. In the bill, as originally introduced, a student could be exempt from intervention if they earned at least a C in the subject and scored above grade level on the two most recent diagnostic assessments. Again, diagnostic assessments are probably not the one snapshot of the best, but at least this gives one a little bit more opportunity for students to show what they can do academically versus being locked into that one day. Restoring that flexibility would help reduce the risk of over-identifying more students for intervention that truly need it. We all want to see Ohio students succeed, and achieving that goal would require thoughtful collaboration with educators, realistic expectations for schools, and the resources necessary to support meaningful improvement that lasts. For these reasons, we urge the lawmakers to reconsider this approach and work with educators to develop solutions that are effective and sustainable. Thank you.
Thank you very much for that. We have several questions from the committee, and I would like to start with Representative Miller for one minute.
Thank you, Chair, and thank you for being here, President. We all want to get kids to where they need to be to be successful, both math, reading, what have you. I'm curious. I like the idea of going back and looking at something other than a one-shot snapshot in time, if you will, with a test. But say this goes through, which most of this stuff has been coming down, raining hard on us. What would you envision will be the way that schools who have already riffed and cut millions of dollars out of their budget, where do they pull to get this done? What do you do?
It's a great question, and we have thousands of educators struggling with that same question because at the end of the day, this is not making school days any longer. It's not providing any more resources. So you're going to be pulling time away from other opportunities in the classroom. And anyone who's been a teacher, an educator in a classroom knows that on any given day, the students can come in with something that you were not prepared for. You might have a unit ready to go for addition, algebra, whatever the case may be, but those kids are coming in with something else on their mind. And until you get to that, you're not getting to the instruction. You're not getting to the opportunities for the academic progress. So where that's going to draw from, we don't know. I mean, I think we just heard the government talk a little bit about adding more reading coaches while districts like ours in Toledo and others are being forced to cut reading coaches to support the reading of science. And so I'm not sure where it's going to draw from, but it will distract from other opportunities for those kids. Thank you.
Ranking Member Brennan for a question.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for being here, Mr. President. Thanks for your service. Appreciate it. You know, the biggest honor of the time I've been here in the General Assembly is being named Legislator of the Year by OFT. So thank you to you and all your members. You know, just like you and everybody in the room, we want our kids to do better in math. We used to have a saying at my school, GBED, get better every day, and that was both for the students and for the staff. I was disappointed with this bill that I've heard that there was no IIP meeting, no interest party meeting when it was being conceived. And we passed out of this committee HB 455 a few months ago, which took some things off the plate for due and for administrators, but didn't really take much off the plate of teachers, and now we want to add a whole bunch more to teachers' plates. Something tells me this is not the way we should be doing this. What would be your advice to the state of Ohio as far as how should we put together a plan to address the math needs of our students in the state of Ohio rather than a bill coming from the Ohio General Assembly
Sure. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, if my answer is fine. So, appreciate the question. And honestly, math, anything in education, I would always start with the educator and the practitioner first and find out where the obstacles and the missed opportunities are. and then work from there, and then I would encourage legislators to meet with those individuals and take what they have to say seriously and embed that in the policy and then figure out how we fully support those things. So when it comes to the increase in math scores, if that's what we're going to be focused on, that's what we're talking about right now, then drill down, find out where some of the issues are, what are some of the teachers, educators saying, include the administrators in that as well, but always recognize that at the end of the day, it's the educators in the classroom and the administrators within those four walls of that said building that are pushing that forward So when legislators are making policy, we have to keep in mind the reality of the classroom, the reality of everything that I've already described that is a classroom, and it is a classless of students sitting in front of you. Quick follow-up, Madam Chair.
That was a full minute, so we're going to move on at this time. Thank you. Representative Pickle-Antonio, did you have a question? Please continue. Thank you, Chair. And President Dalton, I missed the beginning of your testimony, so I apologize. but thank you for service that you've given to the students in Ohio and in your school district specifically. The part I missed was what grade level you teach, but my question, I imagine in the role that you serve, you hear a lot of feedback from educators who are at the elementary grade levels who are navigating still through implementing science of reading and RIMPs. Do you have any sense of, I guess I'm thinking about the structure of a school day and how many hours there are in a day. Do you have any sense or feedback about how, just from a logistical perspective, this would work with some of the mandates that are already in place and some of the new, I guess, a year old at this point initiatives that we are doing related to reading?
Sure. So just a quick rehash, I taught first grade for 17 years, and we're a variety of students, K to 8, and some high school students. Currently not in the classroom, but receive a lot of feedback. And one of the things that we hear, one of the top three things that we hear is not enough time in the day. And dealing with the science of reading and RIMPs, our educators, our members, we were able to have support positions for those which were recently cut. And our district administration and our teachers are currently realizing the detriment of that cut, because the individuals that were helping those documents create them, get them out there, has now fallen back on the classroom teacher, which is then taking away from the actual instructional time. At some point, we've got to figure out what's going to be the priority during the school day. Is it going to be papers and compliance, or is it going to be instruction and development in relationship with students? Just one final question, if you don't mind. So I believe in your testimony and in your comments, you've suggested that a C would be an appropriate threshold for determining whether or not additional support was needed for the student. Can you give some background as to why that score is being recommended when typically what we're hearing is a C does not necessarily mean that you have grade level competency, that you might still be struggling in some areas that might benefit from additional support? Sure. So what I believe I was referencing would be the original, I believe some of the original language was that there would be exempt that they had a C in passing this last two diagnostic tests. Again, I think you have to look at the whole opportunity, the whole academic growth of student. So if it's a C in one area but a D and F in other areas, probably then we need to figure out where to go. The C overall, if the state is determining, which I believe they have a C as a passing grade, then why are we doing, not why are we doing intervention, but hopefully we'll be taking a look at what our standards are we looking at and making sure that the student is getting across all levels. and when you do a diagnostic test once at the beginning of the year or maybe once at the end, you're not hitting everything that you need to know when you're giving that test because students haven't been exposed to it or maybe they have. So I think that's just a suggestion of going back, but it's certainly not the end all. My recommendation would be is to put a pause, meet with educators, and figure out how to move these things forward with the practitioner's voice at the table. Thank you.
Seeing no further questions, we appreciate your time today.
Thank you. I appreciate it.
Next, I'd like to invite Hannah Elhard. Welcome to committee. You'll have five minutes. Let me begin when you're ready. Okay.
Good afternoon, Chair Fowler-Arthur, Vice Chair Odioso, Ranking Member Brennan, and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide interested party testimony today on SB19. My name is Hannah Elhard, as you heard, and I'm here because I'm an elementary school teacher in Ohio who would be directly impacted by this bill's passage. This is my 12th year teaching elementary school. I've taught kindergarten, second grade, and third. This year, I'm a proud third grade educator in the largest district in Ohio. I previously have served as my school's math lead teacher for many years. Last year, 65% of my students scored proficient or above on the third grade math Ohio State test, which was a significant achievement both for our district and our state. I'm glad that we share a goal of improving math achievement for Ohio's children. Math is personally my favorite subject to teach, and I believe it deserves far more attention than it currently receives in elementary classrooms. The concerns that motivate this legislation are real, and I appreciate your effort to address them. However, based on my experience in the classroom, I do not believe math improvement monitoring plans will meaningfully improve math outcomes for our students. My primary concern is how these plans would apply in practice in elementary math, particularly at the beginning of the school year. In reading, if a third grade student tests at the beginning of the year on a second grade level, that appropriately triggers a reading improvement plan. Reading skills are built in a relatively continuous progression. Math does not work in the same way. In third grade, students are introduced to entirely new concepts they've never learned before, including multiplication, division, and several other new concepts. Because of that, it's very common and completely appropriate for students entering third grade to initially test on a second grade level in math. does not necessarily indicate that that child is behind. It is often simply means they've not yet been taught third grade material. In my own classroom, when I see a student entering third grade and they test a second grade level in math, that is not automatically a concern to me as a teacher. It usually indicates that child is ready to learn third grade material that they have not yet encountered. However, if the same type of cutoff score as referenced in the legislation and as is used in reading improvement plans is applied to math, many Many of my students would automatically be placed on math improvement monitoring plans simply because they've not yet learned new content. In practice, this would result in a large percentage of students being placed on monitoring plans even when they do not actually need intervention. This would not be net neutral. When large numbers of students qualify for monitoring plans, teachers must spend significant time completing documentation and compliance paperwork That time does not improve instruction Instead it reduces time teachers have to plan lessons analyze student work collaborate with our colleagues and provide targeted instruction that actually does help students improve in math. Research consistently shows that strong math instruction depends on teachers collaborating in professional learning communities, often referred to as PLCs. In such settings, we get to analyze student work, discuss instructional strategies, and adjust teaching based on what students actually need. However, much of the professional development I currently receive focuses on implementing curriculum as an exact script, rather than examining student thinking or improving instructional strategies. High-quality math instruction requires flexibility, professional judgment, and collaboration among teachers. If our goal of improving math outcomes across the state policies actually support teachers' instructional capacity would likely have a much greater impact, here are a few suggestions. increasing our dedicated instructional time for math in elementary grades, providing protected time for us to collaborate and analyze our students' work, and offering professional development that is actually focused on strengthening math pedagogy rather than curriculum compliance. For those reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to reconsider whether or not math improvement monitoring plans would meaningfully improve math outcomes for our students, and to focus instead on policies that strengthen the math instruction itself. Thank you for your time, for your commitment to improving education for Ohio students. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today. I'm happy to answer any questions you have. Sorry, I'm nervous. I'm also happy to meet individually or with a committee at a later date. Thank you again for the opportunity and for your commitment to our students.
Thank you for your testimony. Representative Manning is recognized for a question.
Thank you, Chair, and thank you for coming in. I taught third grade most of mine. And so I certainly understand about the math, and it's not sequential. And those were good points. You gave some suggestions, but your scores went up pretty significantly. Can you attribute two or three things to that?
Yes, so thank you for the compliment. One of the main things I've done in my classroom is we receive a testing calendar at the beginning of the year of when Ohio State testing will be this year. the week of April 21st, my class is testing on Monday and Tuesday. So from the, or sorry, that Tuesday and Wednesday. So from the beginning of the year, I, we aren't necessarily supposed to, sorry, whoever's listening, but I adjusted our pacing accordingly. So our districts and our curriculum's pacing pace out through the end of the year, but my students are testing mid-April. So I redid our pacing so that they're covering all necessary domains before that. I focus a lot on fluency. I do a lot of individualized instruction. And, I mean, I don't know. Like I mentioned, we're encouraged to follow curriculum like a script. I'm sure as an educator you know that that doesn't reach hardly anyone. And so I've kind of taken it in my hands to really individualize instruction for students and make it fun, engaging, and, yeah, but pacing appropriately to testing is a big part of it, I think. Thank you.
Just a quick follow-up before we move on to the next question. If we were to be able in some way to address the test timing, do you think that that would relieve some pressure when it comes to the pacing and to the performance scores that we're seeing?
Well, I'm always in favor of bumping back testing a bit. So, for example, reading my classes testing in March and the school year ends in May. But I mean I think it addresses a little bit of the pressure but I think the pressure is more based on just like I mentioned like kind of arbitrary cutoff scores is frustrating because like the previous testimony mentioned it one day and if you familiar with eight and nine it really depends on the day of who you going to get So I would prefer a more dynamic measure rather than a one-day, one-shot.
I think timing's part of it, though. Thank you. Representative Miller
is recognized for a one-minute question. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being
here. I think I would stutter and stall if I was in front of third graders. So don't sweat the adults here that can act like third graders sometimes. So with that being said, I've got a question for you. If we paste that out to the end of the year, took the test, got the data back, and then provided these MIMP-type concepts of tutorial support over the summer so that they could be ready to go, and you would have a full curriculum assessment, you would know what areas to target and then they could get that help over the summer.
Do you think that would keep them on pace and also relieve some of the pressure that they're feeling right now? I'm always in favor of year-round support for students. I think it's really beneficial. I think that then my assumption is, I mean, our district is dealing with pretty massive financial changes coming up next year, and part of that's our summer programming is smaller than it has been in the past, so I would be curious on how that would work with implementation. I want to be clear, though, that I think pacing is one concern, but it's certainly not my only concern. I'm more concerned by one specific cutoff score and then by them monopolizing teachers' actual planning time we have to be doing compliance. I think those things have a greater impact. I love summer programming if it's effective and targeted, and I'm happy to see more of it. But I think I wouldn't want to narrow it down to one concern. And I think my greater concern is my time as a teacher, more and more and more of it being spent on compliance paperwork rather than planning, adjusting instruction, analyzing student work, et cetera. Thank you.
Thank you. Ranking Member Brennan is recognized for a question.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for being here, Ms. Ellart. And congratulations. I'm very proud of what you're doing.
Thank you.
Thank you for explaining what thousands of public educators do in our classrooms throughout the state of Ohio every single day. We don't hear your story enough. And I hope more folks like you will come and speak to this committee on issues like this. You're exactly the type of person that we need helping craft how we can best address the needs of the students of Ohio, particularly in this case regarding math. Can you tell us what a student's day would look like if they were required to do both MIMPs and RIMPs? And, of course, if you heard the governor say to the state today, now we're asking for 60 minutes of recess every day. How on earth are we going to do this all in one day? So tell me what that student's day and week looks like in your school. Thank you.
Well, teachers do the impossible every day. I'm proud of my colleagues, and I do love recess, and I'll leave the governor's work to him. But I would say that students' time is – the concern I have as an educator is that due to more movement towards scripted curriculum and then more and more monitoring of children and of teachers, it just creates almost, I would say, over-assessment, and then over rather than I feel like I'm losing instructional time all the time, and what you referenced with can change through the school day as well with new initiatives. So with state testing, with state preparation, and then also with REMPs at the moment, a lot of my school day and therefore my students is spent evaluating, which I think that I evaluate students all the time, but then when it has to be done in a really certain way to match certain paperwork that where my concern comes in because then compliance I think is not a friend of high quality instruction And then I concerned then I really if I lucky, get an hour to teach math in a day, but that's coming directly in from recess. It's right before my student specials. And I love recess. I love specials. Let's keep those, please. But it does, then that hour gets chipped away at every day. And I'm trying to squeeze in so many concepts now that we've accelerated our pacing. So then if more of that time is being spent, well, wait a second, now I need to pull you to assess you because your MIMP needs updated. I'm not spending that time assessing them and instructing them in the way that I really know I need to. Quick follow-up if I have time, Madam Chair.
Just a few seconds. Thank you.
You know, I know I spent a lot of time after school and on weekends going over all the assessments and reflecting on the results and using that to prescribe instruction for the following week. I mean, obviously this is going to impact students' lives, but how would this affect your life as a teacher? One could argue that then teachers will just find time during the day, but as teachers, no one wants to see our students succeed more than we do, and we love them. And we already spend so much time at home doing paperwork and filling things out online that, again, in my opinion, aren't improving their learning. And so this would just then be another thing, and we're already seeing a lack of high quality. You know, we're losing people from the profession, and I don't want to make that worse.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Vice Chair Odioso for a question.
Thank you for coming in here today. I really appreciate it. You're already doing RIMS. How would a MIMP be different for you? Is that a different animal to MIMP as opposed to RIMP?
So I read part of the legislation, the part that applied to MIMPs this morning, the legislation. From what I understand, until I could see the form in front of me, I wouldn't be able to exactly see the part-to-part differences. But from what I understand, it's the same idea that if a student doesn't meet a grade-level score at the beginning of the year, then that student is put on a monitoring plan for the entire year. We update those significantly throughout the year. But again, the thing I feel like it's monitoring is me. It's not necessarily monitoring my students' progress. It's monitoring, am I doing my updates on time? Are the forms filled in? And the only feedback I ever receive about them is, is it done and is it complete? Not, oh, let's talk about how this child's learning. So that's really where my concern comes in. But from what I understand, it will be the same online form. We're required to get different signatures on it. It's a lot of clerical concerns. Yeah. I'm not sure. I haven't seen what the actual form would look like.
Thank you. Thank you.
Any other questions from committee members? I just want to thank you for your service to the students, having two fourth graders and a third grader at the moment. I feel your pain. I think we're all looking at the scores, though, and just asking the question, how do we make sure that every kid is getting a fair shot at succeeding in math? And can you just take a whack at that as your final comments?
I do, actually, and I have one more thing I want to say. So with the science of reading requirements that have come down, one change that I've seen from a professional standpoint is that we've now, I don't know if you're familiar, I don't know if this is statewide or just Columbus, but we do letters training, and it was like this significant requirement.
Okay, great.
Where we really got to understand how does the brain learn reading and all this research behind it, and I love that. And I thought that what I learned in my master's program and just from my own reading is that research, one of the best things we can do for kids is give their teachers really high quality training is improve the quality of their teachers. I don't believe a lot of required forms improves my quality as a teacher. I think that learning does. And so... And like I said, most of my professional developments about math include me, like right now I'm encouraged to carry around my math manual and like read from it like robotically and I, what I would love, and we practice that in our professional developments, what I would love to do instead is do some sort of letter style, but for math where teachers in their professional development time, not on their own time, but get to really dig in with their colleagues and learn a lot about the science of math and understanding how math works, I think that would be a really good use of our time, and if teachers are getting the resources we need, then we can better do that for our kids. I think that would be a better investment.
Thank you so much for your testimony today. I'm sorry, can we hit pause for one moment? Representative Byrd is recognized.
One more. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. If this bill were to pass, as is, do you think this would make you a better teacher, and do you think it would approve math scores in Ohio?
Well, my crystal ball tells me, my assumption would be no on both accounts. I'm always trying to be a better teacher. This is year 12 of what I hope are many, and I've learned a lot. I learn a lot from my colleagues every year, but I don't think I learn a lot from forms. But they do take a lot of my time. And so what I worry, I'm always worried that that will take away from time. I could be learning how to become a better educator. I could be learning from my colleagues instead. and I if there's you know rims have been part of our lives for several years I've filled out dozens and dozens and it's the law we'll keep doing it but I've never seen data that shows me wow like this really helps students get better at reading and if it's out there I'd love to see it I think great teachers help kids learn and I'd love to see more supports but so my short answer would be no I don't for me I'd love to be I'm happy to become a better educator every day nobody's perfect but I don't think extra forms would do that and I don't think it will improve our student scores.
Thank you. Seeing no further questions, thank you very much for your testimony.
Thank you.
This concludes the third hearing on substitute Senate Bill 19. Next I'd like to call House Bill 661 for its fourth hearing. Is there anyone here that wished to testify on 661? Seeing none, I will refer you to the written testimony. We did have an individual planning to come in today and unfortunately became ill, and this will conclude the fourth hearing of House Bill 661. I will now call House Bill 531 for its third hearing and would like to invite Benjamin Eiten to offer opponent testimony. Welcome to committee, sir. You'll have five minutes and may begin when you're ready. Thank you, Chairwoman Fowler-Arthur, Vice Chairman Odioso, Ranking Member Brennan, members of the committee, thank you for allowing me to testify.
My name is Ben Iten, and I am a humanist chaplain and a proud Ohioan. I received my bachelor's and my master's of divinity from the state and completed my chaplaincy training and residency at OhioHealth. I am a certified chaplain educator with the Association for Clinical Pastoral Education, and I have served as a chaplain and chaplain educator in OhioHealth for over 11 years now. I'm immensely proud of the work that I get to do each day to serve my community, and I am here as a concerned member of that community. Chaplains serve the religious and spiritual needs of all people in our care, regardless of their beliefs. It a unique role unfillable by others in the lives of the people we support at the time they need us As a humanist I do not worship a god but I am trained and ready to provide emotional and spiritual support for patients and families whatever their spirituality when they do not have access to or trust in their church, synagogue, mosque, et cetera. We provide support at the time of death. In the midst of traumas, we accompany patients and families through shock and grief and are often the first step in them making meaning of their experiences and connecting them to their spirituality. and chaplains belong in a lot of spaces. We serve in hospitals, prisons, the military, and universities, anywhere people are deprived of their religious communities due to distance, incarceration, or medical necessity. However, for all the spaces in which chaplains serve vital roles, we do not belong in America's public schools. Any attempt to put chaplains in public schools lacks a basic understanding about the role of a chaplain. Public school students in Ohio are already in their religious communities. At the end of the school day, they return to their homes or go straight to their churches, synagogues, and religious communities for religious and moral instruction. The secular skills and expertise chaplains bring to university medical, correctional, military institutions are, to say, the least redundant to the expertise already in our schools.
Much of my job is finding and communicating with family when there is a crisis. I provide emotional support and processing, but there's already paid educators, school counselors, and others that already meet the needs of our students and population, and they are the right people to provide the secular support in public schools. And any religious or spiritual skills or expertise chaplains would bring to schools would jeopardize the religious liberty of students in our secular public education system. Our job as chaplains is to support people as they find struggle with and sometimes leave faith. When appropriate, hospital chaplains may pray with patients, baptize them, give them the Eucharist, or provide other important rituals. Chaplains may also guide a worship service or facilitate Friday Juma prayers. These are the responsibilities of any trained and qualified chaplain, but to do any of this in a public school should make every parent deeply uncomfortable. Furthermore, to do this without evangelizing or projecting the chaplain's own spirituality onto a student takes years of training, something that most congregational leaders cannot do. This is also why the hospitals in town do not let volunteers walk around and be chaplains. They hire well-trained chaplains. Third, optics matter. While this bill may require parental sign-off or any visits between a student and a chaplain, to put chaplains in public schools walking around the halls, sitting in the cafeteria, would create a coercive environment. Putting me or other chaplains in schools would be a disservice to the religious rights of students who understand more than perhaps the sponsors of this bill have given credit for. The Jewish, humanist, Muslim, atheist, or Hindu, and yes, the Christian student, along with the LGBTQIA plus student, will feel uncomfortable because their school is no longer what it was promised to be, a space free from the influence of religious authority figures. A space where, sure, they may debate religion with their peers, but not one where adults in the building are there for a religious purpose, because that's what chaplains are. We serve a religious purpose. But regardless of the coercion and the bill's misunderstanding of the role of a chaplain, the sponsors of this bill purport that it will support students' mental health and safety. And to be clear, there is a student mental health crisis. More than a third of Ohio high school students report feeling consistently sad or hopeless. and for high school students who are LGBTQIA plus that number skyrocket. Nearly a fifth of high school students have considered suicide in 2023 and it a time to invest in what works Thankfully Ohio Department of Education workforce is clear about what we need to do namely at direct schools and districts towards evidence programming and interventions not religious ones And as a person who has definitely spent my life dedicated to supporting the religious and spiritual needs of our community, I resoundingly urge the committee to protect the religious freedom of our students and reject this bill. Thank you for your time and consideration. Be glad to answer any questions.
Thank you for your testimony.
Representative Newman is recognized for a question.
Thank you to the chair, and thank you to the witness for coming in today. So in our proponent testimony, we heard a number of proponents talk about the training, the certification process, and it was quite elaborate. It was quite robust and rigorous for one of these, what is written as an ecclesiastical endorsing authority. The training was quite extensive. And so my question is, you know, in regard to what might appear to some as just chaplains just walking in off the street just to volunteer. That's not what the bill calls for, but rather they have to be endorsed, which includes training and certification. So my question is in regard to the training that some other chaplains have received, as you've mentioned, that you've received. Is there something unique about that training that would enable that chaplain to do something that the chaplains receiving the endorsement? we heard about from proponents, that their training is not capable of providing?
Yeah, through the chair to the representative. To be clear, yes, so clinical pastoral education helps chaplains reflect on how their spirituality and their own religion impacts the care that they provide to other folks. And with respect to, say, the Southern Baptist Convention, who I believe the proponent was talking about last time, they do not require clinical pastoral education for their chaplains, unlike the humanist society who does. That being said, the training that is required for the Southern Baptist pastors, with all due respect, is not particularly rigorous as much as it may feel so. I mean, there have been hundreds of cases of Southern Baptist ministers with respect that have been charged with sexual assault. So there is clearly some sort of lack in the screening and the training going into Southern Baptist ministers. Thank you.
We have Ranking Member Brennan with the next question.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The bill, thank you for coming in. Appreciate your perspective on things. The bill says that the schools will be, are allowed to bring in recognized folks from recognized ecclesiastical endorsing agencies. What does that mean to you?
Yes. So through the chair to the representative, my understanding is that is very open-ended. So the Humanist Society is recognized by the Association for Professional Chaplains as well as the Association for Clinical Pastoral Education. So in theory, the Humanist Society as an endorsing body, if we wanted to, we could have one of our chaplains go through and be a volunteer for the community. Follow-up?
Continue.
Would you agree that the best way to address our diverse students' mental health needs would be to provide our public schools with more robust funding to hire highly qualified guidance counselor or school counselors?
Yeah, through the chair to the representative, absolutely. You know, chaplains, we are there to provide emotional support, yes, but really a religious and spiritual support. And as the bill notes, you know, chaplains are different than guidance counselors. and really if we serious about the mental health and well of our students we should provide good funding for licensed trained guidance counselors not for chaplains Last question if I have time Continue Are you do you believe that there are folks out there that would want to be chaplains
who are qualified to be chaplains, are well-versed in students with special needs and all their diverse needs?
Through the chair to the representative, that's a fabulous question that I'm not sure I know the answer to. I know that we have clinical postural education programs at Children's Hospital. Their expertise I cannot speak to. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Representative Miller is recognized for a question.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Chaplain, for being here. So part of me says that if a school district, which I love giving back their ability to choose this and volunteer, wants to do this, something in me says this could be a good thing if the community as a whole is looking to do this. My concern is, yes, the military has chaplains, and yes, other areas have chaplains, but I'm afraid with the, and I want your thoughts on this, with this very Christian nationalist movement sliding into our institutions, do you fear that we may get the same type of thing that's happened in the military over why they're going to Iran, maybe that kind of chaplaining would happen in school systems?
Yeah, through the chaplain to the representative, or through the chaplain, pardon me, through the chair to the representative. Chaplains are on my brain. Yeah, so that is honestly a bit of my concern. No matter how much we train and we open this up to just volunteers, whatever their endorsement process may be, I do worry that this is really a way to backdoor a certain Christian perspective into our public school systems rather than, again, allowing for their true religious liberty and true religious freedom of our students when they go home.
Vice Chair Odioso.
If I may follow the rules.
Wait a second.
Right with you. Thanks for coming in. I'm looking at this from the perspective of my years as a teacher and administrator at a Catholic school, where thank God we don't have the separation to even consider. But that same connection between the spiritual world and reality that I believe in applies to public school students. And I truly believe that. And looking at this, I see the bill as being permissive. It does not require students to talk with a chaplain, and it requires parental consent. I know that during my time as a teacher, kids committed suicide. They died in car wrecks. Parents died. And so there's death. And let's just start with that and suicide. I don't see how this impinges on any separation of church and state. And I think it's permissive standard. Can you enlighten me as to why you feel otherwise?
Through the chair, to the representative, it is also – I can't speak to the constitutionality, but I can speak to the concern of my kids were raised – I was raised in a Christian school. I went to Worthington Christians High School. My kids went to public schools. They went to Dublin schools as non-Christian students. And the amount of coercion and anxiety that they experienced without a chaplain, in the public schools to a religiosity that was not their own was already very high. If we add a chaplain into the public schools, even if there is a boundary of the parental rights or parental permission to allow students go there, the very presence of a chaplain in the hall is a visible presence and is by itself coercive. and that to me as a parent gives me pause because we are not there as just secular people. We are there as religious and spiritual authorities for which the bill recognizes. I agree with the bill's definition of a chaplain. That's why we should not be there.
I follow up for Representative Miller.
Thank you, Chair. Following up on that, again, I actually like the idea of a chaplain being available at the community and at the school district and what have you. My biggest concern is always trying to put guardrails in there so that these type of things don't happen. My follow-up question to that is, is there a way that if we put in or they put into this bill, mended this bill, a way that you could have an anonymous reporting where you won't get punished by maybe fellow students, administrators, whomever, for saying, I feel really uncomfortable when I went to this chaplain or what this chaplain is doing in the school or what my friends are telling me. Would that maybe calm some of the fears that maybe you and I both have? I want to speak for myself.
Through the chaplain to the representative, or the chaplain. I'm going to try it. I'll try it. You'll try it. I don't know if it's a good thing. I'll gladly train all of you. Clinical Pascal education. Come reach out to me. And then the joking I forgot. Yes. So, you know, even an anonymous reporting process, in my mind, it still comes back to the idea that chaplains, even I as a humanist chaplain, am a religious and spiritual authority. And putting us within public schools concerns me. Now, if there is a tragedy, when there is suicide, when there is death, when there's something along those lines, we have seen time and time again the ways that the religious leaders in the community do step up, right, and do provide care and support for the community outside of the normal school sides of things. And so that is not really what this bill is for as I'm reading it. Instead, it is about how do we instill religious and spiritual professionals into public schools, which to me is very problematic.
Ranking Member Brennan.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to clarify and see what your thoughts are. The bill is not entirely permissive. There is the requirement that a school district or school vote on whether to adopt a policy authorizing volunteer chaplain. Any thoughts on that requirement that they adopt a resolution allowing the practice?
Yeah, through the chair to the representative, yeah, I mean, it is a mandated vote, right, by the end of the year. And so in that degree, it is not permissive to the school districts necessarily, and it does require, again, to me, in my mind, It is inviting a certain level of conflict and a certain level of burden onto the school districts that they're already overburdened on. They're already trying to manage underfunding in their school districts and to have another thing that they have to try to manage in that process I mean who are they going to recognize as an endorser Who are they going you know what happens if the chaplain does something wrong within the community Who is liable for that You know these are things that the school boards will have to figure out if they're going to adopt this. And they're already taxed and overburdened, and it doesn't make sense to me in that side of things to have them ask them to do even more vetting of folks.
Follow up if I can. Continue.
Can you just explain to us, like, I was at the American Legion meeting last night, and they basically said I could be chaplain if I want to. I don't feel qualified to be chaplain for our American Legion, not that I'm interested in it, but something tells me that there needs to be some different requirements for somebody to chaplain for children as opposed to maybe the military or the Legion or a hospital or some other organization. Any thoughts on that? I'm trying to get my arms around that part of it.
Yeah, through the chair to the representative, that's a fair idea. It's something that I haven't given a lot of thought to, quite frankly. When we look at hospital systems, again, when family members are, because of medical reasons, isolated from their religious communities, we have chaplains in those spaces providing support to kiddos and to their family members. the, again, to the additional training that they get, that is unique from, say, an adult program that's at Grant, like mine, I can't speak to. But, yeah, I would be concerned that if any chaplain walked into that door, that they were not just endorsed, but they were highly qualified and trained, especially in sort of human development, childhood development, and childhood education. Yeah.
Representative Newman's recognized for a question. Thank you to the chair, and thank you
to the chaplain. Much appreciated. Thank you for taking our questions. So yes, part of the function would be if the school board were to decide this chaplain will be used just when there's an emergency or a case of death. So that would certainly be one of the functions of chaplains of schools, as well as others as a school board might choose. Again, it's local control. They would write their policy. But my question, my next question is regarding to those students who might feel uncomfortable or coerced or constrained in some way by the presence of a chaplain in the school when they're not actually talking to them. Their parent hasn't given the permission or they don't choose to. Is there anything unique about a chaplain that would be different from, let's say, a school teacher who is a spiritual authority because he or she is a pastor or a spiritual leader in their church, but they also teach, could be a priest who teaches in the school or has some other role in the school. Why is it that the presence of that religious person doesn't make students feel coerced or uncomfortable, but just the presence of a chaplain who isn't talking to the student. Why does the present, does the student read their mind? Is there something
they're wearing? What would make that different or unique? Yeah, through the chair to the representative, I mean, to be clear, two things. The experience of my own kids in public school is that when teachers bring their religiosity into this classroom, which they do, It does bring a level of coercion to those students who are not Christian or who do not align with that teacher's spirituality. Add on to that, then chaplains are different from educators and guidance counselors, as the bill notes, because chaplains are defined in the bill, and rightfully so, as religious and spiritual authority figures. They are in the school because they are religious and spiritual beings and religious and spiritual authority figures, not just a teacher who happens to be spiritual not just a guidance counselor who happens to be spiritual They are there as a religious and spiritual authority in the public school That is distinctly different Representative Piccli Antonio for the last question
Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being here today. I don't want to presume, but I'm wondering if you
have ever been to a school board meeting or watched a school board meeting and just wondering your thoughts about what dialogue might be like at a school board meeting when debating whether or not to implement a policy that would allow chaplains in a school building? Yeah, through the chair to
the representative, I have seen school board meetings, they can be quite contentious, emotions get high and I worry about that. You know, in the best case scenario, they're as civil as we are today. But my experience of many school board meetings is that they are not so, especially when you get anxious parents involved and passionate folks involved, those things can, those conversations can get very charged and very hard to navigate. And again, you know, I've seen school board members not necessarily navigate those particularly well. Again, they've got a lot on their plate. They're doing their best. But when you add that level of kind of emotional charge conversation, that's a hard thing to navigate.
I apologize. We do have one more question. Representative Thomas.
Sir, thanks for being here today. I appreciate your testimony. I just have one question, and it involves around, you've said if someone has a particular religion that they're more likely to be transferring that religion or trying to perhaps proselytize. So I was just reading what you wrote here. You said, chaplains serve the religious and spiritual needs of all people in our care, regardless of their beliefs. It's a unique role and fillable by others in the lives of the people we support at the time they need us. As a humanist, I do not worship God, but I am trained and ready to support the needs of all of these different groups. So if you say that you're able to do that,
why wouldn't the chaplains who would serve potentially as a writer of this bill be able to do the same? Yeah, through the chair to the representative. Again, I have had over 12 units of clinical pastoral education, and it has taken me a long time and lots of training to learn to take that neutral and open and honest space with my patients and my students as I provide them care and support. Again, this bill, on the first hand, does not require any sort of educational training that would help those particular chaplain volunteers who walk in off the street, endorsed or otherwise, to serve that space. Secondly, it is not just, again, that the chaplains are not educated properly, but the mere presence of chaplains, again, as the bill delineates us, as religious authorities, as spiritual figures in the public school system, is the potential harm that is being caused here.
Seeing no further questions, thank you for your testimony and your time. just before I call the next witness I do want to note that we have to be out of this room at four o'clock and since that leaves us 34 minutes I unfortunately am going to need to limit future testimonies to three minutes per person and ask committee members that we limit it to very short questions please thank you next I'd like to invite Sean Grime to offer testimony Welcome to committee Apologize that you get the truncated version But please proceed when you ready Chair Fowler Vice Chair Odioso Ranking Member Brennan and members of the House Education Committee
thank you for the opportunity to provide opposition testimony on House Bill 531 on behalf of the Ohio School Counselor Association.
I would like to start by expressing my appreciation to the sponsors for their specific recognition of the essential work school counselors provide to Ohio students. Our opposition to this bill is not reflective of our support for the role faith has for many of our students and families, but of our position of the importance for students to have access to licensed professionals who are specifically trained and accountable for meeting the mental health needs of each and every student. School counselors undergo extensive training to support the whole child through academic, career, and emotional support. We are qualified to deliver a comprehensive school counseling program to each and every student that focuses on prevention, intervention, and responsive services. House Bill 531 would allow districts to create non-uniform policies, allowing volunteer chaplains to offer a broad scope of services that would lack standardized accountability, unlike those provided by school counselors who were evaluated against set state standards. We question whether the training and credentials for school chaplains will be in alignment with the requirements of educators under federal and state law. Will school chaplains be held to the same standards of mandated reporting regarding child abuse, harm to self, and harm to others? Will they be held to the same standards in reporting bullying and credible threats? Will they be held to the same standards of parental rights as enacted under House Bill 8 to ensure parents are notified of significant changes to a student's physical, mental, or emotional well-being? Will they be required to undergo the same ongoing and mandated training as licensed educators to ensure the safety of students? We also have questions as to how school chaplain services will be managed. The bill is not clear as to whether school chaplains will be considered representatives of the school or if they will be providing service independently. It also does not address the potential liability schools may face in situations of negligence. Lastly, it does not account for the added administrative impact that will be placed on schools, oftentimes school counselors, in obtaining parental consents, monitoring student access to the chaplain, and addressing the concerns that may be raised that the chaplain is not equipped to address. Because school counselors strive to serve each and every student, we also have concerns that schools who opt in to volunteer chaplain services will not be able to equally represent all practicing religions in their student populations, leaving students to feel left out. We recognize the bill's intention is to help alleviate the burdens of schools in addressing student mental health needs, but instead would advise this committee address these needs by further supporting the educational professionals who are already in the schools through considerations such as mandated ratios, job descriptions that emphasize direct services to students, and re-evaluations of state regulations that create burdensome administrative overload. It is for these reasons that we respectfully request that the members of this committee vote no on House Bill 531.
Thank you for your testimony. We appreciate your timeliness there.
Representative Newman is recognized for a question.
Thank you to the chair, and thank you, sir, for your testimony today. Part of our talking with interested parties, one of the things that we heard several times was parents who recognize the need for emotional support, relational support in the schools, and the number of parents in certain communities, All communities aren't the same, but certainly in rural America, there's a tendency toward, you know, it's a community of faith. A lot of people tend to go to the same church and they go to the same school. For parents who would like their child to have mental health counseling that is faith-based, that isn't present in the school because of the school counselor that's hired by the school, but they wish that to be available at their school, if that community were to go to the school board and make that request and the school board would say, yes, we will happily write a policy that accommodates our community. Do you think that would be wrong?
Through the chair to the right representative. I would have to know more about, I guess, who the chaplain is. I would caution that we don't confuse mental health services with chaplaincy, because they could be very different things. So spiritual guidance and stuff may not be the same as what would be considered traditional mental health services. I would also kind of just caution that, you know, you know, for parents that are seeking mental health services for the students, whether that's faith-based or non-faith-based, obviously they have access, you know, we schools, we work with families to make referrals, to provide opportunities for them to access those resources and things. So again, I think it would kind of depend on who the particular people are that are in the school and what their background and their training is and how that is used. But I guess an example I would use we have a lot of school counselors that are dual license so they have their educational school counselor license but they also hold like an LPC or an LSW license you know in the school setting if you're employed as a school counselor even though you might have that mental health license it's unethical to practice under that license if you're employed as a school counselor so even in our role like we don't as a school counselor we don't necessarily even provide that same level of mental health support that like an an LPC or an LSW would. So while we're supporting the kids, if kids need significant help, then that's where we refer out to other licensed professionals. So I'm not sure if that totally answers your question, but I think that's part of where our question is, is kind of what the role is really about, because it's kind of mentioned about student mental health needs, but certified chaplains aren't licensed mental health care providers through the state. So I guess that would be a distinction that I would have.
Thank you.
Ranking Member Brennan for a question. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Director Grime, for being here today, and thanks to all of our school counselors throughout the state of Ohio for the yeoman's work that they do for our children, especially in today's world of social media and everything we dealt with during the pandemic. and afterward. Could you maybe elaborate on how we could better address the mental health needs of our students in the state of Ohio? What would be some of your recommendations other than this?
I mean, we're definitely proponents of kids having access to, you know, licensed, trained mental health providers. So whether that's, you know, I know it's definitely been a positive, you know, when more monies were made available for schools to kind of address some of those. So a lot of schools have been able to create partnerships, you know, with agencies to be able to kind of reduce some of those barriers for kids to access licensed mental health providers. You know, so that's been helpful. I think, you know, obviously anything that we're doing that's kind of getting at the root of some of those causes. So, you know, just even simple steps of encouraging, you know, working with the schools to reduce, you know, cell phone, you know, access during the school day and stuff to kind of try to better contain some of those things for kids. I think those are the things that are helpful. you know you have you know whether it's school counselors whether it's school based mental health professionals school social workers school psychologists you have professionals that are in the schools you know but a lot of folks are dealing with very high caseloads you know where you working with 500 600 1 students multiple buildings potentially you know, where we're having more of that would be helpful. I think just also addressing some of the administrative. I also work as a high school counselor. A lot of my day is spent chasing paperwork and college credit plus and transcripts and graduation requirements and things and doesn't maybe always necessarily open up as much time as would be beneficial for working with kids.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your comments. Next, I would like to invite Liam Strasbaugh.
Strasbaugh, excuse me. Welcome to committee. You have three minutes. All right.
Chair Fowler Arthur, Vice Chair Odioso, Ranking Member Brennan, and members of the House Education Committee, my name is Liam Strasbaugh, and I thank you for the opportunity to provide opponent testimony on House Bill 531 on behalf of the Ohio chapter of the National Association of Social Workers. While NASW Ohio can appreciate the sponsor's intention of desiring more support for Ohio students, we firmly believe that this support should come from licensed clinicians who are trained specifically in this area and whom are held to a state licensing board for set standards, scope of practice, and disciplinary action and monitoring as needed. School social workers and counselors receive extensive training and state licensure with mandatory continuing education to be able to support all children from all backgrounds and beliefs through all of their life stages. NASW Ohio has concerns that school chaplains lack the formal knowledge and training that is required to deal with mental health emergencies and concerns. While having the chaplains undergo a background check is a great start, will the chaplains be required to receive training or credentialing similar to that of teachers or school social workers and counselors? There's also concern about mandatory reporting requirements. ORC 2151.421A4A states that clerics designated by a church, religious society, or faith acting as a leader, official or delegate, or in an official or professional capacity must report known or suspected child abuse. but HB 531 clearly labels the school chaplains as volunteers not necessarily serving in any official capacity, leaving questions as to their requirement to report child abuse and neglect. There is also question of whether these chaplains will be subject to the same reporting requirements established under House Bill 8, as again, they are not necessarily school staff. As the chaplains are not school staff and would be volunteers, who is responsible for their oversight? Are they representatives of the school, representatives of the church, or are they simply independent? What services are they allowed to perform in the school? There are no limitations or guidelines laid out in the bill, so will there be protections against proselytization in schools, or limitations on anti-LGBTQ rhetoric, or religiously based advice on sex, or equitable faith representation for students who aren't Christian? In 2024, the Association of Professional Chaplains and the Board of Chaplaincy Certification both declared in a written statement that they oppose legislation like this, stating, quote, the proposed legislation does not require the chaplain to have the proper professional credentials to serve in such sensitive environments like the public school system. They continue to say that chaplains serving schools, particularly public education, where they will encounter vulnerable children with diverse faiths and backgrounds, should be scrutinized with requirements similar to teachers, social workers, and school counselors. In our evaluation, a short online training course is insufficient for what is needed to serve as a professional chaplain, end quote. If even the certifying body and professional association for chaplains are opposed to bills like this, why are we not following their lead? Ohio students deserve support from professionals who are specifically trained licensed and overseen by the state to meet their needs We ask that you vote no on HB 531 Thank you Thank you for your testimony Do we have questions from the committee
I guess you get off easy, sir. Thank you for coming in today.
Thank you.
Next, I'd like to invite Ivory Kennedy, Jr. to offer testimony. Welcome to committee.
Thank you.
We have three minutes.
Chair Fowler-Arthur, Vice Chair Odioso, Ranking Member Brennan, and members of the Education Committee, I'm here to express my concern about the direction of some of the members that appear to be taken with respect to the needs of public education, especially with this bill for volunteer chaplains. First, a majority of you voted yes on HB 486 to allow the positive teaching of Christianity in public schools based on the unfounded premise that faith is under attack and that public schools need more religion-focused intervention from the legislature. Instead, I urge the committee to redirect its attention to the genuine needs of public schools and to the students who rely on a government that is of the people, by the people, and should be supportive of all the people that it serves. While this legislation is framed as a volunteer effort, it does not appear to be in good faith. Good faith is in people like Dr. Bernard Lafayette, an extraordinary leader who played a pivotal role in efforts in organizing in Selma, who recently passed away, who dedicated his life to faith, justice, and the belief that America had not yet reached its potential but one day could. His legacy stands in contrast with what we are witnessing today as legislatures across the nation, including this one, appear to be employing religion in ways that feel weaponized that are echoing troubling patterns of our past, of our shared past. Rather than pursuing this legislation of this nature, we should focus on providing additional counseling resources, like some people have said before, and allowing individuals' spiritual journey to remain personal and self-directed. What if we prioritize ensuring that school funding is adequate and equitable? What ultimately is the true objective of this bill? I am trying my best to ask all of you to spend time with people like me who believe in America's promises and stick to the idea of freedom of religion that folks came to this land seeking away from European oppression. The statement that Representative Newman has on a website says that Jonathan Newman knows education must be directed by parents, teachers, and local school boards, not politicians and bureaucrats in Columbus. And it raises an important question. Does this legislation not itself represent the instance of political influence over education? Each of you have the power to make this state an example of what truly could be possible for all children of all ethnicities and all religions to go to school and get a first-class education in this state without national politics and supremacy influencing it. I will not rest until we can come to some sort of agreement that you all would be up to taking a historical literacy test to prove that what you are putting down for policy is rooted in historical truths and facts that we all share. I'm willing to take any questions, and I hope that we can maybe one day take that test and make that available to constituents.
Thank you. Do we have any questions from the committee? Seeing none, thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Next, I'd like to invite Nick Bates to offer his testimony. Welcome to committee. You get three minutes when you're ready.
Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and Ranking Member. My name is Deacon Nick Bates, and I am serving as the Interim Executive Director of the Ohio Council of Churches. The Council of Churches has served the state of Ohio for more than 100 years as a movement towards unity, justice, and peace. The Ohio Council of Churches supports the work of chaplains in society, but has concerns about House Bill 531. chaplains provide an important service in places like our military hospitals and prisons by offering guidance and support on many diverse issues the u has recognized the need for chaplains in these kind of locations because individuals are confined to those places and to not do so would be a violation of their First Amendment rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. However, House Bill 531 only requires two things for an individual to be declared a chaplain in one of our public schools, endorsement from a religious body and the ability to pass a background check. I meet these requirements to be defined as a chaplain under this bill. Frankly, this lowers the standards, as we have heard, for chaplains, and we cannot lower standards for our children. Clinical pastoral education, or CPE, is a key component of the training required for chaplaincy. The skill set required to minister in these type of settings is more than what many of us receive in seminary. Most Masters of Divinity programs, which is a degree that many receive to receive that ecclesiastical endorsement, often requires one single unit of CPE. But to be a board-certified chaplain, for example, requires a minimum of four units, and most receive even more. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections requires a full year of CPE training before a person can be hired as a chaplain in our prisons. Through CPE requirements, it allows our public bodies to provide proper oversight without running into the problem of discrimination based on theology or ideology. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution forbids this chamber or any school district from weighing the quality of different religious bodies. Does certification by the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster qualify? How about the Neo-American church that preaches that LSD and cannabis are part of their religious sacraments? What about the church that seeks to provide alcohol to children? What about dudism that celebrates the dude from the Big Lebowski? And I do have family members who are ordained to that tradition. Without CPE or board certification requirements, this legislation will require that any school district that welcomes chaplains into the building to welcome individuals potentially from these endorsing ecclesiastical bodies if they're able to pass a background check. any any attempt to limit the religious volunteers from proclaiming their re their religious beliefs will invite lawsuits against this chamber the state and local school districts as well so we highly encourage that this body operate with caution in pursuing this uh this process because we owe our children a great deal of protection in society and sadly the church and others have failed our children over and over again. Thank you. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you for your testimony. Do we have any questions from committee? Ranking Member Brennan.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for being here, Deacon. You know, another thought that occurred to me is the potential liability. So, you know, I mean, God forbid a kid that's suicidal visit the chaplain and maybe they give him bad advice and then something bad happens. What then?
Yeah, through the chair to the representative. As I talked in preparation for today's hearing and when this bill was first introduced, talking to some of our chaplains currently serving in prison settings, and they work very closely with the psychologists and psychiatrists that are also serving those same patients or those same inmates, because when individuals reach the issue of fear of suicide and things, most pastors, most deacons, Most chaplains are not actually equipped and properly trained to handle those mental health crisis. So they need to be working in tandem with other individuals. And as with volunteers in our school district, with education privacy laws and things, we're going to run into complications.
And Madam Chair, follow-up?
A brief follow-up? That was my other issue was, you know, HIPAA and student data. I mean, it just seems that could create some messes there as well.
Yeah. Through the chair to the representative, I was speaking recently to a pastoral candidate who has done a lot of work on child sex abuse, a former police officer and other things. And one thing she had told me was many churches right now are taking advice from their insurance companies on how to keep children safe. The insurance company's job is to protect money, to protect from lawsuits, not to protect children. And she is working to change some of that culture within our faith communities to how can we actually be prioritizing the protection of children and not just our assets.
Thank you. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Do we have any further questions from the committee? Seeing none, thank you for your time and your testimony.
Thank you so much.
Before we conclude, I want to direct members to the written testimonies on your tablets. There are a number of testimonies included there, and this will conclude the third hearing on House Bill 531. Next, I'd like to call House Bill 674 for its second hearing and invite Jason Key and Tammy Osler to offer testimony. and I do apologize. We are going to have three minutes for your remarks and then we'll try to expound in the questions.
Chairwoman Fowler-Arthur, Vice Chair Odioso, Ranking Member Brennan, and members of the House Education Committee. My name is Jason Key, and I am the Assistant Legal Counsel for Charter School Specialists. This is my colleague, Tammy Osler, who is also General Counsel for Charter School Specialists. To be respectful of the committee's time, You have the full written testimony, and I will only be sharing a part of that today. I will start by giving a little of my background to explain my expertise in this area. I've held a CDL for the last 26 years, and I've driven in a number of different formats, including school bus driver and a TNC driver. I have also worked as a transportation supervisor for two different school districts here in Ohio, Newark City Schools and Gahanna Jefferson Public Schools. House Bill 674 offers an alternative that could be a much-needed relief for many districts and community schools. This bill permits a district or a community school to contract with a transportation network company, a TNC, to provide transportation services. The contract that each district or community school enters into with a TNC will be optional and can be unique and be tailored to fit the specific needs of that district or community school. Currently, under Ohio Administrative Code 3301-8319, districts are already permitted to use school vans to transport students and to contract with mass transit vehicles or taxi cabs to transport students. Permitting the option of allowing TNCs to transport students to and from school is very similar to permitting student transportation via taxi cabs. Providing the option of TNCs permits school districts and community schools that do not have access to a taxi cab service to be able to still use this flexibility in transporting students. As a transportation supervisor, a frequent issue that I faced was providing immediate transportation services to a student. Under the McKinney-Vento Act, a student that is experiencing homelessness or a student that is placed in foster care must be provided immediate transportation to and from home and school. While this is already difficult for students that move within the boundary of the district, the McKinney-Vento Act permits students who are no longer in the district to continue attending the school of origin Permitting a district or community school to contract with a TNC to assist with transportation under the McKinney Act would alleviate this transportation issue since TNCs already have a number of drivers all over the state that are available and have vehicles that can provide this transportation. Another challenge that I faced is student locations being inaccessible by a school bus. This typically arose when a student had mobility issues and the pickup drop-off needed to be at the student's house. If the student lived down a dead-end street or the road was narrow and had cars parked on both sides of the street, a school bus may not have been able to access the student. Permitting districts and schools to contract with TNCs will allow those resources to still be able to provide safe and reliable transportation that can reach the student. We believe the House Committee should support this bill to provide districts and community schools with this additional option for school transportation. Thank you so much.
Before we get into some of the other questions, can you just briefly elaborate on the McKinney-Vento Act and how compliance with that is currently done?
Yes, Chairman Fowler-Arthur. So the McKinney-Vento Act currently requires a homeless liaison to work within a school district. If a student is deemed to be homeless or potentially homeless, the homeless liaison will then be contacting the parent and then will also be contacting the transportation department to work through those issues. In some cases, the parents may reach out directly to the transportation department and make that request. Sometimes that does occur after the transportation department or the school is closed for the day. And so then having transportation the next morning makes it very difficult to comply with that.
Thank you for that. Representative Miller is recognized for a question.
Thank you, Chair. Just real quick, how does this compare to a school district's ability right now to transport in the same vehicles with their trained drivers? And then second, what is the criteria that these TNCs have to go through, these drivers in the TNC network? what kind of training do they have to go through to be able to move our children safely from point A to point B? Through the chairwoman to the representative.
Could you repeat your question?
Chair?
Okay.
So if I may again, what right now in code doesn't allow a school district to do this? And then second, if it does not allow them to do it, what are safeguards that TNC puts in place in the quality of training and guidelines that allows them to do this and not the school district?
So the first part is there are only permissible uses of vehicles, school bus, charter bus, mass transit vehicle, taxi cab, and a school van. Those are the only permitted uses. And so then the TNC would not fall under one of those categories because a taxi cab is actually licensed through the city, and so this would fall outside of that range. Could you repeat the second part of your question?
So in other words, they can't use the same school buses, according to ORC, is what you're saying. So the second part of that is if school districts can't use these vehicles in their fleet to transfer kids, why are we handing this off to another entity? And are they trained? And why should they be allowed to circumvent what's already in law right now for local districts?
So there is still some training involved but they do have to meet certain qualifications under the bill The other option is that as school districts are entering into these contracts with the TNCs they would be designing their own limitations and their own qualifications. They could require certain additional training above and beyond what is already included in this bill.
Okay, there's not much training in the bill. That's why I'm asking. Actually, there's no training in the bill except for, hey, stop at a railroad. stop or whatever. I mean, there's no training in this bill. That's what I'm getting at. How do we make sure we have guardrails to keep our kids safe? Is this training enough and what training is out there for TNCs?
The expectation for the use of TNCs would be more of the supplemental to already existing transportation. The expectation would be not to make it a regular route to and from school, but more to be the release valve, the safety valve to try to help get these kids to school, from school immediately while the routing is being worked through and while all that transportation is being arranged. But there are still safeguards that can be done because they do still have to go through certain training through the company or certain measures through the company.
Ranking Member Brennan is recognized for a question.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I see some potential unfunded mandates in this bill and potential liabilities. My question first is, you know, let's say that there's a child who is multi-handicapped. Is the school district going to be on the hook for, under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, for retrofitting the vehicle to get that child from point A to point B?
Through the chairwoman, to the representative, my understanding is that, yes, the district is already required to have all of those safeguards in place to be able to safely transport a student. So if a TNC is given this option, the TNC would also have to make those same accommodations if they were going to be able to transport the student.
Follow-up? Follow-up. Thank you. My question is, would that fall on the school district or on the vendor?
Through the chairwoman to the representative, are you asking that as it would be on a regular route, or are you asking for that immediate relief? I mean, whoever the child is that needs to be picked up, I mean, if it's a child that's in a wheelchair, they're going to need an adaptive mobility vehicle so that their wheelchair can be picked up and they can be placed into the vehicle. So who pays to retrofit that vehicle?
I understand that. I did a bill on this last General Assembly. I know these costs can be very, very expensive to retrofit vehicles.
Through the chairwoman to the representative, I believe the expectation would be that there would be no retrofit of the vehicle. It would rather be the vehicle that is already available through the company. As in Uber may have an Uber X, which is a larger size vehicle. It may have a Uber XL, which is a larger size vehicle. My understanding would be that these companies would then be able to have the option to have these wheelchair lift vehicles or have other vehicles that would be needed. One of the issues that I had at one point in time was a student needed to be transported in the backseat of a police car. The student had a lot of issues that was involved, and so we had to actually contract with a police car. We had to purchase a police car in order to transport that student safely.
Final question, if I may? Very briefly. Thank you so much. Will school districts be punished if Uber doesn't show up?
Through the chairwoman to the representative don have an answer to that question I believe that is a good question for further thought Thank you Representative Piclantonio is recognized for a question
Thank you, Chair. Good to see you, Jason.
Thank you for coming in to committee today. I certainly understand the desperation, I will say desperation, that those who try to manage all of the requirements related to busing students, not just from the public school district, but also as required to all of the other schools that are within that school district. I understand the impetus for this legislation. The question that I have is really related to liability, and I don't know if you have the answer to this or not, but the current regulatory framework that we have in place for TNCs, I mean, the drivers themselves are independent contractors. They are not employees. So the owners of the TNC can only exert actually very minimal control over the drivers in order to keep them as independent contractors and not employees. We also have a bill that is pending in Transportation Committee that would further decrease the possible liability to TNCs. So my question is, who is responsible if it's not the TNC and it's not the driver and the school district doesn't want to be responsible if something happens. That's the piece of this that I am really, really struggling with, and I wondered if you had thoughts about that. Through the chairwoman to the representative,
I don't know that I can speak too much on this because a lot of that would actually have to go through the companies, but I would say when I was serving as the transportation supervisor, the transportation departments actually operated under sovereign immunity. So then any sort of school van or any sort of contractor that we worked with, they would also operate under that same protection, under that sovereign immunity. I had not used taxicabs for either of the districts that I was at, but my understanding from those districts that had was that they also operated under that same, was the sovereign immunity. So interestingly, taxicab drivers are actually employees, and TNC drivers are independent contractors.
That's really what I'm trying to understand is, like, who would be responsible? It doesn't sound like anybody.
Through the chair room to the representative. I think that is a better question for the companies.
Thank you for your testimony today. I don't believe we have any further questions from the committee. Thank you for coming in. The next guest is Ashley Munson. Welcome to committee. You'll have three minutes. I may begin when you...
Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. Chair Fowler, Arthur, Vice Chair, Odioso, Ranking Member Brennan, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony in support of House Bill 674. My name is Ashley Munson, and I serve as the Government Relations Manager for Hopskip Drive. You all have my written testimony, so I'll try to address some of the questions that were just presented. Hopskip Drive is a technology company born from necessity. Over 10 years ago, three working mothers sought to solve their own child care transportation struggles, designed a service built on a simple premise. What would it take for me to feel safe putting my own child into this car? Today, we connect students and those needing extra care with highly vetted caregivers on wheels, including grandparents, babysitters, and retired teachers. We have supported over 18,000 schools across more than 20 states, partnering with more than 2,000 school districts, government agencies, and nonprofits to provide safe, flexible, and customizable transportation. Our support for this legislation is rooted in a single priority, that is safety. This bill does not create new behavior. It formalizes and secures transportation practices that are already happening across Ohio every day. Under current Ohio law, school districts may contract for transportation using non-school bus vehicles seating 12 or fewer passengers. However, these regulations do not contemplate the unique TNC model, where drivers utilize their own vehicles, nor do they account for the innovative technologies that allow for real-time safety monitoring. House Bill 674 fills a critical functioning gap by specifically authorizing school districts to partner with TNCs while establishing baseline safety requirements tailored to this model. This is particularly vital for the students whose traditional systems were never designed to meet. Foster youth and McKinney-Ventil students, federal law already guarantees that these students arrive to their school of origin. However, traditional yellow bus routes cannot accommodate a child who moves on a Tuesday afternoon. Hopskill Drive offers a six-hour turnaround time for a new ride request, ensuring a student who moves on a Monday can be in class on Tuesday. Students with special needs as well, for a student whose IEP requires a consistent driver and a quiet ride, a standard bus may be a source of significant anxiety. Our model allows for individualized must-be-met protocols delivered directly to the driver's app. Career and technical education many programs are housed in regional centers requiring commutes that no fixed route bus serves House Bill 674 ensures students don lose their career pathway simply because they lack a ride to a different campus We do vetting. We have a 15-point certification. I know somebody asked about safety earlier. Our drivers go through three databases, fingerprint background checks, comprehensive name base background checks, and also we have a monitoring system that happens every month providing regular updates for the schools. Happy to take any questions and address some of the questions that were provided before my testimony. Thank you so much.
You mentioned in your testimony that there are more than 20 states that you're already working in. Could you give us some examples and let us know if our proposed language is lining up with the other states or if there's anything that we should be considering?
Yeah, we are in 20 states. I cannot name all of them, but I'm going to try. California, Arizona, Minnesota, Michigan, Indiana. And we are also in Georgia. We are in Michigan. We are in Wisconsin. We are in a few others that I can get to the committee to make sure that I don't jack up the names of the states. But to your second question, we're seeing in other states the same thing. Some states need different regulations. So Colorado is similar to Ohio and some other states that we just have to modify what's already being stated in law.
Thank you. We would be grateful for that follow-up information. For sure. Do we have any other questions? You may have a minute, but please direct it through the chair.
Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I wondering if perhaps you can answer the liability question that I had for unfairly to Mr Key And I don know if you have an example of the contracts that you have with your drivers I assume because you are a TNC your drivers are also independent contractors. The question that I have specifically is if the school district is protected from liability and the TNC is protected from liability, who is liable if something, God forbid, were to happen on the ride to or from a program. For sure.
Through the speaker, to the representative. So the TNC would be liable. House Bill 674 seeks to further codify the status of TNC drivers as independent contractors and shield the underlying digital platforms from being sued under product liability or employer-based negligence theories, provided that the company meets its statutory safety requirements. House Bill 674 still requires TNCs to comply with the insurance requirements under 4925. There is no protection for a TNC that does not follow the law. More importantly, our bill lets districts impose stricter requirements to ensure accountability for wrongdoing. So for the contract, schools are able to amp up those requirements other than what's required in law when it comes to safety and liability. But the contract essentially governs what happens between the TNC and the school, but the TNC is liable. Thank you.
Ranking Member Brennan for a question.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I kind of related the question I asked before. You know, if a student requires IEP accommodations, how are those requirements met?
So it starts with the to the chair through the chair to the representative So it starts with the contract with the school The school and the TNC said which type of population needs the nimble help so that foster care unhoused or students with IEP So it starts with there, and then they are able to work with our safety ride platform that essentially lays out it's 10 students that needs rides. So they adjust the pricing, the amount, they get paid based off mileage and pay. But long story short, it is addressed by the contract through the TNC and the school district.
Follow-up? Brief follow-up. Thank you. Obviously, this is not a law in Ohio yet, but in those other states, if, for instance, you're not able to get that kid to school on time, or if the service is unreliable, I'm sure that happens sometimes, what are the ramifications if that were to occur?
To the chair? Through the chair to the representative. So if someone is not able to get to school due to the TNC, the TNC is liable. However, we have people that are our ride safety support team that ensures if the car is stopped, if the car makes a wrong turn. So we're monitoring what happens in that vehicle so that driver will probably have repercussions, whether that means deactivation or face other consequences to eventually be led off the platform if that is a behavior that continues. Or we try to make sure if it's one-off infractions, maybe to get them off the platform. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Do we have any other questions for this witness? Seeing none, thank you for your time. Thank you for coming in, and we look forward to your follow-up materials. Thank you, Madam Chair. This concludes the second hearing on House Bill 674, and seeing no further business before the committee, the chaplain speaker chair says the committee is adjourned.