http://blog.cleveland.com/sunmessenger/2010/08/law_director_tells_south_eucli.html

Law director tells South Euclid traffic camera group it is doesn't have enough petition signatures
Published: Saturday, August 07, 2010, 12:06 PM
 Jeff Piorkowski, Sun News
Follow Share this story
Story tools

It’s a case of petition déjà vu in South Euclid.
Last week, for the second Time in the same week, Law Director Michael Lograsso declared that there were not enough valid signatures on petitions to put a charter change attempt on the Nov. 2 general election ballot.
The first time involved a petition drive on the part of the political action committee Citizens for Accountable government, who want voters to decide whether City Council can ever again change the income tax credit allowed residents who work outside of South Euclid.
Later in the week, Lograsso said a drive by those seeking to eliminate traffic cameras in South Euclid fell short of valid signatures.
Clerk of Council Keith Benjamin said that of 544 signatures that were turned in by the traffic camera group, 419 were valid.
That 419 amount seemed like more than enough for the drive’s organizer, Grant McCallum, who is of the belief that only 251 valid signatures are needed, as 251 represents 10 percent of those who voted in the last mayoral election in 2007.
As he did in the matter resolving the tax credit, Lograsso’s legal opinion is that because the traffic camera group is attempting to make a charter change — it wants to add a 14th article to the city’s charter banning traffic cameras — that 10 percent of the city’s total registered electorate must sign a petition.
Lograsso said that 1,640 valid signatures must accompany the ballot request.
“These are elected officials who are sworn by oath to uphold the city charter,” Benjamin said of any suspicion on the part of petition signers that the city doesn’t want the issue on the ballot. “That’s our city’s constitution.
“If it (the petition drive) was done like our charter says it must be done, nobody would have any problem with putting it on the ballot.”
Lograsso sent a letter to McCallum dated July 30 in which the law director points to Article 11 of the city charter in which it is stated that “not less than 10 percent of the registered electors of the city, setting forth any proposed amendment to the charter,” must sign the petitions.
McCallum points to the Ohio Constitution, Article 18, Section 9, to back his belief that the 251 signatures were all that was necessary.
McCallum said he sent a letter Friday to Lograsso asking that the law director examine the Ohio Constitution and then give another legal opinion on the ballot matter.
“We want this to go on the November ballot,” McCallum said.
The petition group, according to McCallum, had no trouble getting residents to sign their petition against the traffic cameras. The group is being guided in its efforts by the Cincinnati-based organization COAST, which has successfully fought the implementation of traffic cameras in other Ohio cities.
In South Euclid, which is part of the South Euclid-Lyndhurst School District, cameras were to be placed on school buses this year in an effort to identify those who commit traffic offenses when school children are boarding or getting off buses. It would be the first such program in the country.
The school board has decided to withhold its approval of the school bus cameras pending the outcome of the petition drive.
In addition, South Euclid City Council approved the purchase of a camera that is to be affixed to a mobile speed enforcement trailer.
When asked what he would do if Lograsso stays with the opinion that the matter cannot be placed on the ballot, McCallum said, “I will talk to our legal counsel and look at the next option.”
The petition group is also getting legal advice from COAST lawyers.
McCallum said his group has until 60 days before the Nov. 2 election, or until Sept. 3 to get the approval of South Euclid to put the issue on the Nov. 2 ballot.
“The next course of action for us could be a lawsuit,” McCallum said. “I don’t want it to get to that. I’m confident that the law director will look at the Ohio Constitution and allow this to go on the ballot.” 
Contact Piorkowski at û
(216) 986-5862. û

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Title
Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Email
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (registered users only)
	Add Comment Preview