State ex rel. Repeal the Lorain Cty. Permissive Sales Tax Commt. v. Lorain Cty. Bd. of Elections (Slip Opinion), 2017 Ohio 7648

In Dec. 2016 the Lorain County Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 16-799, increasing the county permissive sales (and certain use) tax by 0.25%, effective April 1, 2017; the resolution was not adopted as an emergency measure.
Relators ("the committee") circulated an initiative petition captioned "Petition for Repeal of County Permissive Tax" seeking repeal of the resolution/increase and submitted signatures; the board of elections certified a sufficient number of valid signatures.
The Lorain County Board of Elections concluded the petition was legally defective for placement on the ballot because R.C. 5739.022(A) permits repeal by initiative only for permissive-tax measures "that was adopted as an emergency measure."
The committee filed an expedited mandamus petition asking the Ohio Supreme Court to compel the board to certify the petition; the board moved to strike one affidavit paragraph alleging the county auditor unlawfully refused to accept a certified filing.
The Court denied the motion to strike as unnecessary under Civ.R. 12(F) and denied the writ, holding R.C. 5739.022(A) applies to repeal of taxes enacted by emergency measure (and does not provide a right to repeal a non-emergency tax increase already in effect).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether R.C. 5739.022(A) permits an initiative repeal of a county permissive tax or only repeal of an increase adopted as an emergency measure	The statutory phrase "that was adopted as an emergency measure" modifies only "an increase in the rate," so R.C. 5739.022(A) allows repeal of an entire permissive tax regardless of how enacted	The phrase modifies both "a county permissive tax" and "an increase in the rate," so R.C. 5739.022(A) permits repeal only for taxes or increases adopted as emergency measures	Held: R.C. 5739.022(A) governs repeal of emergency-adopted taxes/increases; because the resolution here was non-emergency, the committee has no clear legal right to mandamus relief
Whether paragraph in relator Phillips’ affidavit accusing the auditor of "wrongful and unlawful" conduct should be stricken as scandalous or immaterial	Paragraph is factual and permissible; not scandalous and should remain	Board sought to strike it as false, scandalous, and immaterial	Held: Motion to strike denied; allegation not scandalous and, even if immaterial, Civ.R.12(F) not to be used to excise peripheral factual assertions

State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, 131 Ohio St.3d 55, 2012-Ohio-69, 960 N.E.2d 452 (sets mandamus elements and burden of proof)
Portage Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v. Akron, 109 Ohio St.3d 106, 2006-Ohio-954, 846 N.E.2d 478 (apply unambiguous statutes as written)
D.A.B.E., Inc. v. Toledo-Lucas Cty. Bd. of Health, 96 Ohio St.3d 250, 2002-Ohio-4172, 773 N.E.2d 536 (statutes construed within their statutory scheme)
Stewart v. Trumbull Cty. Bd. of Elections, 34 Ohio St.2d 129, 1973 (legislative intent primarily from statute language)
State ex rel. Savarese v. Buckeye Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 74 Ohio St.3d 543, 1996 (when statute unambiguous, apply as written)
Caldwell v. State, 115 Ohio St. 458, 1926 (primary goal is discerning legislative intent from text)
State ex rel. White v. Kilbane Koch, 96 Ohio St.3d 395, 2002-Ohio-4848, 775 N.E.2d 508 (courts should decide only issues necessary to resolve the claim)
State ex rel. Baldzicki v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 90 Ohio St.3d 238, 2000 (narrow issue doctrine in mandamus/election matters)
Egan v. Natl. Distillers & Chem. Corp., 25 Ohio St.3d 176, 1986 (court should avoid unnecessary rulings)