In June, Gov. Mike DeWine signed House Bill (HB) 99, which expands the Ohio School Safety Center (OSSC) and outlines training and public notice requirements for school districts that authorize individuals to go armed on school grounds. In anticipation of the bill’s effective date on Monday, Sept. 12, this blog post will answer some of the frequently asked questions we’ve received on the bill.
Does HB 99 allow districts to authorize an individual to be armed on school grounds?
Under existing law, law enforcement officers, security officers employed by the local board and “any other person who has written authorization from the board of education or governing body of a school” were permitted to be armed on school grounds. HB 99 did not amend the general list of individuals who are permitted to be armed on school grounds.
Does HB 99 require districts to have an armed individual on school grounds?
No. The bill does not require districts to have an armed individual on school grounds. It leaves the decision entirely to local school boards. If the board is not interested in authorizing an individual to be armed on school grounds, no action is needed. Some boards have elected to adopt resolutions or issue public notices that they do not have plans to authorize an individual to be armed on school grounds, but this is not required under HB 99 or existing law.
If a board is interested in authorizing an individual to be armed on school grounds, what steps must the district follow?
The board must authorize the individual to convey and possess a deadly weapon or dangerous ordnance into a school safety zone. Other than requiring the authorization to be in writing, the statute does not discuss how such authorization must occur or what specific language must be included. As a result, districts that are interested in authorizing an individual to be armed on school grounds are encouraged to work with their board counsel to discuss their authorization process, which may include discussions in executive session, a board resolution, and/or approving updates to the district’s school safety plan.
HB 99 requires the board to notify the public, by “whatever means the affected school regularly communicates with the public,” that the board has authorized one or more persons to go armed within a school operated by the board. This notice is not required to provide the names of the authorized individuals, their positions in the district, or the school buildings at which they work. This notice is a public record.
The board must ensure that any individual who it has authorized to go armed on school grounds has successfully completed the required training (see “What training is now required under HB 99?”) or is a law enforcement officer.
The board must require the authorized individual to submit to an annual criminal records check. These records checks are to be conducted in the same manner as the criminal records check that the district conducts for potential new hires of the district under RC 3319.39 and 3319.391.
The board must provide to OSSC a current list of the qualified personnel authorized to convey deadly weapons or dangerous ordnance into a school safety zone who have completed training. This list is not a public record.
What training is now required under HB 99?
Individuals who are employed by a board as a special police officer, security guard or in a similar law enforcement or security position must complete an approved basic peace officer training program or twenty years of active duty as a peace officer (RC 109.78(D)(1)).
Any individual who is not employed as a special police officer or security officer, but who is employed by a board that has authorized them to be armed on school grounds, must complete a new training curriculum established under HB 99, unless that individual is a law enforcement officer or has satisfactorily completed an approved basic peace officer training program. The new HB 99 training curriculum requires individuals to complete up to 24 hours of initial training and up to 8 hours of yearly requalification training. OSSC, through its newly-created Safety & Crisis Division, will develop the required initial training curriculum, yearly requalifying curriculum, and optional additional training curriculum for those authorized by the districts to carry a firearm on school grounds. HB 99 requires the training to include modules on specific topics, including scenario-based training. A district may adopt alternate curriculum, instruction and training, so long as it includes the required HB 99 topics and so long as the alternative curriculum, instruction and training receives prior approval from OSSC.
As a reminder, school resource officers (SRO) who are appointed through a memorandum of understanding between a law enforcement agency and a school district to provide services to a school district are also subject to certain training requirements, regardless of whether these individuals are armed on school grounds. RC 3313.951(B)(1) requires these individuals to complete a basic training program approved by the Ohio peace officer training commission, plus at least 40 hours of SRO training within one year of appointment. HB 99 did not adjust these training requirements.
May school districts require individuals to have training in excess of what is required by HB 99?
Yes. Nothing in HB 99 prohibits a school district board of education from requiring additional training for an individual the board is authorizing to be armed on school grounds.
Who must pay for the training?
The board of education that authorizes an individual to be armed on school grounds must pay all fees for the training that the individual receives.
Which records relative to a board’s authorization are public records?
The public notice that the board must send when it authorizes an individual to go armed within one of its schools is a public record. HB 99 specifically excludes from the definition of a public record those records that identify the individuals who have completed the training that is required prior to the board authorizing the individual be armed on school grounds. Existing law continues to exempt a district’s school emergency management plans and other school security records from the definition of a public record.
Any time school districts consider alternatives or modifications to their safety or security plans, they should seek and carefully measure input from a number of sources, including parents, employees, board counsel, the district’s insurance provider, and local law enforcement, safety, and other government officials. OSSC and OSBA can also assist districts with their efforts to strengthen school safety. If you have any general questions about the new HB 99 requirements, please contact OSBA’s legal division for more information.