Cities see death knell ringing on 'home rule'

Local laws increasingly wiped out for state rules
Monday, December 04, 2006
Reginald Fields
Plain Dealer Bureau

Columbus- This year alone, the legislature has passed at least three bills that vaporized local laws in Cleveland and elsewhere. Another such bill is pending in the Senate.

 The way the legislature sees it, the so-called "home rule" provision of the Ohio Constitution - which lets cities pass local laws - is barely worth the paper on which it is printed.

 "I think that when we look back on this 126th General Assembly . . . the epitaph has to be the death of home rule," said State Sen. Eric Fingerhut, a Shaker Heights Democrat.

 And the state's courts, including the Ohio Supreme Court, could be added to the ranks of those taking turns ringing the death knell. Judges have upheld several key laws that sacrifice local statutes for uniform state rules.

 In January, Gov. Bob Taft signed a bill wiping away restrictive residency rules for municipal workers, replacing it with a more employee-flexible statewide law. Cleveland, Akron and several other cities have filed lawsuits over the law.

 Then in May, the governor signed a stepped-up predatory lending law. On Jan. 1, it will replace an existing mortgage fraud statute that the Supreme Court in November upheld while knocking down Cleveland's law.

 "We conclude that any local ordinances that seek to prohibit conduct that the state has authorized are . . . unconstitutional," wrote Justice Terrence O'Donnell for the 5-2 decision.

 And last week, the legislature approved a bill that would revise the state's concealed-firearms law to establish one set of rules for legally toting a gun, replacing more than 80 local ordinances. Taft, however, has said he will veto that bill.

 Looking ahead, a bill that would regulate the use of red light and speeding cameras has already cleared the House and is expected to pass the Senate before the end of this year.

 "This legislature - from predatory lending, to residency, to red-light cameras and now concealed weapons - is continuing an assault on the rights of our people," Cleveland Law Director Robert Triozzi said through a spokeswoman. "The city won't be intimidated from defending its rights under home rule."

Cities see death knell ringing on home rule'

 Meanwhile, a 2004 law authorizing state control of gas drilling and well regulating over local rules was upheld in June by a Cuyahoga County judge.

 State Sen. Tim Grendell, a Chester Township Republican who sponsored the residency bill, said the home-rule section of the state Constitution was always intended to be secondary to the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution.

 "It did not create a series of city states within the boundaries of the great state of Ohio," Grendell said. "Constitutionally recognized rights are not diminished or enhanced because you elect to live on one side or the other of a municipal boundary."

 Grendell also chairs a task force on eminent domain that is working to define "blight" for the purpose of legally taking over land for development projects. Its recommendation could replace a mish-mash of definitions that vary from city to city.

 At the Statehouse, Democrats tend to support "home rule" while Republicans do not. But that is not always the case. The residency bill passed with bipartisan support.

 Home rule is based on Article 18, section 3 of the Ohio Constitution, established in 1912, which authorizes local governments to enforce laws specific to their area as long as they "are not in conflict with general laws."

 In passing bills encroaching on home rule, the legislature deems these items to be of statewide concern, which is reason enough to bypass the local power rule, said Case Western Reserve University law professor Jonathan Entin.

 "What they are basically saying is that some issues are too important to leave to the possible patchwork of inconsistent local laws," said Entin, who expects more anti-home-rule laws to land before the state Supreme Court.

 And despite the high court's recent ruling favoring the state's predatory lending law over Cleveland's, the justices remain unpredictable when it comes to "home rule" cases because they don't review each case the same way, Entin said.

 "Actually, there is a long line of Supreme Court rulings about home rule," Entin said, "but the court has left a lot of confusion."

To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:

rfields@plaind.com, 800-228-8272


© 2006 The Plain Dealer© 2006 cleveland.com All Rights Reserved.