THE STATE EX REL. LANGE v. KING, CLERK.
No. 2015-1281
Supreme Court of Ohio
Submitted August 21, 2015—Decided August 25, 2015.
144 Ohio St.3d 349, 2015-Ohio-3440
{¶ 19} The Delaware County Board of Elections did not abuse its discretion in complying with
Douglas P. Crowl, pro se.
Carol Hamilton O‘Brien, Delaware County Prosecuting Attorney, and Christopher D. Betts and Andrew J. King, Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, for respondent.
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} This is an expedited election case seeking a writ of mandamus to compel Kathleen King, clerk of the village of Newton Falls, to transmit a certified copy of a proposed initiative, along with the supporting petitions, to the Trumbull County Board of Elections. We grant the writ.
Background
{¶ 2} Newton Falls Ordinance 2014-11 repealed a provision allowing residents a credit for income taxes paid to another municipality. Relator, Werner Lange,
{¶ 3} The next step in the process is for the clerk to determine the sufficiency and validity of the petition, and, if the petition passes muster, to transmit a certified copy of the text of the proposed initiative, along with the petitions, to the board of elections for placement on the ballot.
{¶ 4} On August 6, 2015, Lange filed this suit for a writ of mandamus to compel King to transmit the petition and certified text to the board of elections. Pursuant to the court‘s procedures for expedited elections cases, Lange filed a merit brief with exhibits, and King filed a merit brief, but no evidence. Lange did not file a reply brief. The matter is now ripe for decision.
Analysis
{¶ 5}
{¶ 6} First, King argues that Lange filed his proposed measure with the wrong municipal official. In State ex rel. Columbus Coalition for Responsive Govt. v. Blevins, this court held that “if a municipality has an auditor, then proponents of an initiative must file a precirculation copy with the auditor, or else they have no right to place their initiative on the ballot.” 140 Ohio St.3d 294, 2014-Ohio-3745, 17 N.E.3d 578, ¶ 7. Lange‘s petition was filed with the clerk and not with the director of finance.
{¶ 7}
{¶ 8} Newton Falls, on the other hand, is a village.
{¶ 9} Second, King suggests that the initiative would affect two separate laws, in violation of
{¶ 10} Finally, King claims that the tax credit would have “the unconstitutional effect of impairing the City‘s contractual obligations.” Specifically, King argues that retaining the tax credit will reduce Newton Falls’ general revenue fund by $225,000, which will impair Newton Falls’ ability to meet contractual obligations such as debt maintenance and employee-benefit contracts.
{¶ 11} As noted above, King‘s discretion is limited: it is an abuse of discretion for a village clerk to inquire into substantive questions “not evident on the face of the petition.” Webb, 106 Ohio St.3d 437, 2005-Ohio-5009, 835 N.E.2d 1222, at ¶ 30. The fiscal impact of the measure is a question that falls outside the four corners of the document. We therefore hold that it was an abuse of discretion for the clerk to refuse to certify this petition on that basis. Moreover, even if King did have such discretion, there is no evidence in the record to substantiate her claim about the fiscal impact the measure would have.
{¶ 12} Based on the foregoing, we grant the writ of mandamus, and we order the clerk of Newton Falls to transmit the petitions and certified text of the proposed initiative to the Trumbull County Board of Elections.
Writ granted.
O‘CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O‘DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY, FRENCH, and O‘NEILL, JJ., concur.
Werner Lange, pro se.
A. Joseph Fritz, for respondent.