State ex rel. Jacquemin v. Union Cty. Bd. of Elections (Slip Opinion)
147 Ohio St. 3d 467
Ohio2016Background
- Jerome Township trustees adopted Resolution No. 15-167 rezoning ~60.43 acres (Jacquemin and Wesner parcels) to a mixed-use PUD after a 2–1 vote at a December 23, 2015 hearing.
- Opponents delivered referendum petitions on January 20, 2016; each part-petition included a statutory “brief summary” required by R.C. 519.12(H).
- The petition summary described the nearest intersection as Hyland-Croy Road and SR 161 (Post Road) and referenced exhibits and the record of proceedings.
- Relators Paul and Mary Jacquemin protested the petition to the Union County Board of Elections; the Wesners filed a separate protest. The board held a hearing and voted 3–1 to deny the protests and place the referendum on the November 2016 ballot.
- The Jacquemins sought mandamus to prevent the board from placing the referendum on the ballot, arguing the petition summary was misleading and thus failed R.C. 519.12(H); the Supreme Court of Ohio granted mandamus, finding the summary misleading.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the petition’s “brief summary” complied with R.C. 519.12(H) | Jacquemin: summary is misleading due to errors/omissions (closest-intersection misidentified), so petition invalid | Board: summary sufficient; any errors were minor and did not mislead signers | Held: summary misleading because misidentifying nearest intersection could lead signers to confuse this rezoning with a separate, contentious development near Post Road; petition invalid and board abused discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Gemienhardt v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Elections, 109 Ohio St.3d 212 (2006) (petition summaries must fairly and accurately present issues to voters)
- State ex rel. C.V. Perry & Co. v. Licking Cty. Bd. of Elections, 94 Ohio St.3d 442 (2002) (summary must be accurate and unambiguous)
- State ex rel. Hamilton v. Clinton Cty. Bd. of Elections, 67 Ohio St.3d 556 (1993) (misleading or materially omissive summaries invalidate petitions)
- Shelly & Sands, Inc. v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Elections, 12 Ohio St.3d 140 (1984) (same)
- State ex rel. Holwadel v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Elections, 144 Ohio St.3d 579 (2015) (standard of review for county board decisions: fraud, corruption, abuse of discretion, or clear disregard of law)