Feed on
Posts
Comments

Tag Archive 'home rule'

Beck Energy filed a mandamus action in the Ohio Supreme Court, seeking to vacate a stop work order issued by Munroe Falls to halt work on the Sunoco well.   Beck Energy seeks a declaration that: “The Home Rule Amendment to the Ohio Constitution, Article XVIII,Section 3, does not allow Munroe Falls to enact a zoning […]

Read Full Post »

The Second District Court of appeals held that  SB 342 did not violate the Ohio Constitution’s home rule provisions.  SB 342 requires police officers to be present when traffic cameras are operating, and imposes other restrictions on the use of traffic cameras.  The Montgomery County Common Pleas Court ruled that these provisions violated the City […]

Read Full Post »

Ohio’s Home-Rule Amendment: Why Ohio’s General Assembly Creating Regional Governments would Combat the Regional Race to the Bottom under Current Home-Rule Principles Jonathon Angarola A Citizen’s Guide to Redisticting Reform Through Referendum Grayson Keith Sieg

Read Full Post »

Ohio’s budget act, HB 64, requires that municipalities operating traffic cameras in violation of state restrictions lose local government funding from the state in the amount equal to the fines collected from the cameras.  The Ohio legislature recently enacted restrictions on traffic cameras, such as requiring police officers to be present, and other restrictions. See SB 342.  Several county […]

Read Full Post »

The Lucas County Common Pleas Court held yesterday that State legislation requiring police officers to be present, and imposing other restrictions on the operation of traffic cameras,  SB 342, violates the home rule provision of the Ohio Constitution.  See Toledo v. State, Lucas C.P. Case No. CI-201501828.  The City of Toledo was granted an injunction.  […]

Read Full Post »

Ohioans for Concealed Carry sued the City of Cleveland in order to strike down the City’s new gun ordinance because it is preempted by state law.  See Ohioans for Concealed Carry, Inc. v. City of Cleveland, Cuyahoga County Docket Number CV-15-844547.  ORC 9.68 states: …the general assembly finds the need to provide uniform laws throughout […]

Read Full Post »

According to the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court, the Ohio law requiring a police officer to be present during operation of traffic cameras, SB 342 , violates the Home Rule provision of the Ohio Constitution.  The Court granted a permanent injunction in favor of the City of Dayton to stop the state law from going […]

Read Full Post »

State legislation requiring police officers to be present, and imposing other restrictions on the operation of traffic cameras,  SB 342 , will not go into effect in Toledo today.  See Toledo Blade City gets stay of red-light camera law.  A Lucas County judge granted Toledo a preliminary injunction halting the parts of state legislation from […]

Read Full Post »

The Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas struck down Broadview Heights’ drilling prohibitions as preempted by ORC Chapter 1509.  See Bass Energy, Inc. v. City of Broadview Heights, Cuyahoga Common Pleas Court Case no. CV-14-828074, Opinion and Judgment Entry (Mar. 10, 2015).  Following the recent Ohio Supreme Court decision, State ex rel. Morrison v. Beck […]

Read Full Post »

The City of Toledo sued the State of Ohio, seeking a temporary and permanent injunction to prevent Ohio’s new traffic camera legislation,  SB 342 ,from going into effect. (See Toledo Blade,  Toledo sues over traffic camera ban).  SB 342 requires that a police officer be present when a traffic camera is in operation, making traffic […]

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »