COLUMBUS, Ohio - The proposed fix to congressional redistricting Ohio voters will be asked to approve in May might not be the best solution, but it's far better than what exists now.

Think of it this way: should it pass, the politicians will still have their hands in the cookie jar, but Grandma will be lurking around the corner trying to make sure no one gets more than their fair share.

The amendment to the Ohio Constitution the General Assembly is placing on the ballot includes rules designed to keep most counties together, a directive (not precisely defined) to keep districts compact and encouragement for bipartisan approval.

Ultimately, however, it will be up to the politicians - operating for the first time under state-mandated restraints - to make sure Ohio's next congressional map created in 2021 isn't some form of a repeat of the current map that was designed for partisan reasons.

Learn more about gerrymandering, what's wrong with it and potential fixes for Ohio from a cleveland.com series - Out of Line: Impact 2017 and Beyond

The plan has the support of a coalition of good-government groups that had been circulating petitions for their own proposal. It's possible that the petition plan could still go to the voters in November, if the May issue fails.

Here's how the new plan stacks up.

Will the politicians remain in charge?

Yes. Unlike in other states, including Arizona, California and Iowa, an independent commission or a non-partisan state agency will not be in charge of creating the Ohio map.

The chief sponsor in the Ohio Senate, Republican Matt Huffman of Lima, firmly believes this is the work of the state legislature.

That's why the map-drawing will start in the legislature, then possibly be turned over to a seven-member commission of lawmakers and their appointees.

The separate petition plan would give all this authority to the seven-member commission.

Will the minority party have a say?

Yes, for all but a last resort.

Under current law, maps can be approved with a simple majority vote of the legislature and the governor's signature.

When last two maps were approved in 2001 and 2011, Republicans controlled all three steps in the process - the Ohio House, Ohio Senate and governor's office.

The result is a current map that makes little geographic sense and almost no competitive races, leading to Republican wins far exceeding the state's political leanings.

The work on the maps would be much different going forward.

The legislature could approve the maps with a super majority (60 percent), but only if at least 50 percent of the members of the minority party vote yes.

If that fails, the work would go to a new commission made up of the governor, secretary of state, auditor and four appointments from the legislature. This commission could set the map, but only with votes from at least two members of each party.

If that fails, it goes back to the legislature, where approval from 60 percent of the members would be needed, but this time with only one-third of the minority members.

If that fails, the legislature could approve a map for four years - instead of 10 years - by a simple majority.

The legislative actions would require approval from the governor, unless a veto is overridden. And the public could seek to overturn the maps through a referendum.

Richard Gunther, a professor emeritus of political science at Ohio State University, is concerned that the process will fall to one of the last two steps, requiring little or no bipartisan buy-in. He helped craft the separate petition proposal.

Current Ohio congressional districts were designed to heavily favor Republicans in 12 districts and Democrats in four, leaving little opportunity for general election voters to hold their representatives accountable. These results from 2016 show no close races. Rep. Pat Tiberi has since resigned his seat.

Is this method different from what was proposed in the petition?

The Ohio League of Women Voters, Common Cause Ohio, the Ohio Environmental Council and others since last year have been circulating petitions aimed at placing reform on the November ballot.

Their plan calls for handing the work directly to the seven-member commission - bypassing the legislature. The commission would be required to come up with a map, with at least two votes from each party represented on the commission.

The petition plan includes stricter rules on how the maps could be drawn, including limits on when cities, townships and counties could be split, and rules maintaining a political balance in Ohio based on previous statewide election results.

What would the new plan mean for Cleveland?

Cleveland would get a single representative, unlike now where the East Side is represented by Marcia Fudge of Warrensville Heights and the West Side by Marcy Kaptur of Toledo - both Democrats.

Cleveland and Cincinnati could not be split under the new rules.

But since the cities are not large enough for a wholly contained district, their districts would extend into the suburbs. How this is done will be the call of the politicians, hopefully working for a bipartisan solution in the interest of the voters.

Columbus, which currently is larger than a single district, likely would have one wholly contained district, and one shared with neighboring communities.

Otherwise, there generally are no city specific rules in the proposal.

The separate petition proposal sets rules to "minimize the number of splits of counties, municipal corporations and townships, in that order."

Under current law, there are no limits.

What about Cuyahoga and Summit counties?

Fewer splits.

Both Cuyahoga and Summit counties currently are in parts of four districts, all extending into other counties.

The proposal would prevent creating more than three districts in any county.

The congressional map now splits Cuyahoga and Summit counties four ways each, and Lorain and Portage counties three ways each.

How about other counties?

There are no limits now. All 88 counties can be split, if the lawmakers so desire.

Under the proposal going on the May ballot, 65 counties must remain wholly within a single district, 18 counties could be split two ways, and five counties could be split three ways.

The proposal, however, is silent on which counties could be split, raising an objection from Lorain Democrat Rep. Dan Ramos, who complained on the Ohio House floor that nothing was included to prevent Lorain County from being split three ways as it currently is.

One current congressional district extends from a corner of Lorain County to near the Indiana border. Another crosses the northern portion of Lorain County, cutting through on the way from Cleveland to Toledo.

The petition proposal seems to place a higher priority on limiting county splits, but does not specifically say how few counties could be split.

Rep. Dan Ramos of Lorain worries that the proposal leaves open the possibility of a map like this, splitting Lorain County into three far-reaching districts. This is the current map.

What other rules are included involving county splits?

As noted earlier, there are no current restrictions.

Huffman designed some new rules for the May ballot proposal to eliminate some the shenanigans done previously.

For example, if a county is split into two districts, each district must be contiguous within the county.

The example shown below for Hamilton County would no longer be allowed.

Sen. Matt Huffman used this Hamilton County congressional map to highlight one form of map drawing that would not be allowed under the proposal.

What is the status of the petition proposal?

Think of it an insurance policy for those who really want reform.

"We need to discuss our next steps with our coalition partners," Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio, told cleveland.com in an email Tuesday. "We will be focusing on the May Primary but I definitely don't want to put those clipboards away unless SJR (Senate Joint Resolution) 5/Issue 1 passes."

The coalition has gathered about 200,000 signatures, two-thirds of what is needed to take its proposal to the November ballot.

Will all this work?

Credit State Sen. Kenny Yuko, Democrat of Richmond Heights, for offering a dose of honesty during his speech on the Senate floor before voting Monday to place the proposal on the May ballot.

"Might not be picture perfect. Might not even work," Yuko said."I can't guarantee it. But I think what we did was create an opportunity that is better today than what we had in the past."

Rich Exner, data analysis editor for cleveland.com, writes about numbers on a variety of topics. Follow on Twitter @RichExner.

Previously: