Title: State ex rel. Lange v. King

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as 
State ex rel. Lange v. King, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-3440.] 
 
 
 
NOTICE 
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in 
an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports.  Readers are requested 
to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 
65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or 
other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be 
made before the opinion is published. 
 
 
SLIP OPINION NO. 2015-OHIO-3440 
THE STATE EX REL. LANGE v. KING, CLERK. 
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 
may be cited as State ex rel. Lange v. King, Slip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-3440.] 
Mandamus—Writ of mandamus sought to compel village clerk to transmit a 
certified copy of a proposed initiative to the county board of elections—
Writ granted. 
(No. 2015-1281—Submitted August 21, 2015—Decided August 25, 2015.) 
IN MANDAMUS. 
________________ 
 
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. 
 
 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
Background 
{¶ 2} Newton Falls Ordinance 2014-11 repealed a provision allowing 
residents a credit for income taxes paid to another municipality.  Relator, Werner 
Lange, circulated petitions to place an initiative on the ballot to restore the tax 
credit and to mandate that the restoration of the credit be repealed only by popular 
vote.  On July 29, 2015, the Trumbull County Board of Elections certified 220 
valid signatures, more than the 114 signatures required to place the measure on 
the ballot. 
{¶ 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.  R.C. 731.28.  King 
has not done so. 
{¶ 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} R.C. 731.28 sets forth a procedure for initiative petitions.  Once the 
board of elections certifies the signatures, the clerk exercises “ ‘limited, 
discretionary authority’ ” to determine the sufficiency and validity of the petition.  
State ex rel. N. Main St. Coalition v. Webb, 106 Ohio St.3d 437, 2005-Ohio-5009, 
835 N.E.2d 1222, ¶ 25, quoting State ex rel. Ditmars v. McSweeney, 94 Ohio 
St.3d 472, 477, 764 N.E.2d 971 (2002).  In her brief, King suggests three reasons 
why the initiative petition should not be certified, none of which has merit. 
{¶ 6} First, King argues that Lange filed his proposed measure with the 
wrong municipal official.  In State ex rel. Columbus Coalition for Responsive 
January Term, 2015 
 
3
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} R.C. 731.28 provides that an initiative or referendum petition signed 
by the required number of electors must be filed with “the city auditor or village 
clerk.”  (Emphasis added).  The measure in Blevins had to be filed with the 
auditor because Columbus is a city and does not have a “village clerk.”  See also 
State ex rel. Bogart v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 67 Ohio St.3d 554, 621 
N.E.2d 389 (1993) (involving a petition filed in the city of Beachwood). 
{¶ 8} Newton Falls, on the other hand, is a village.  R.C. 703.01(A) 
defines a “city” as a municipal corporation that, at the most recent federal census, 
had a population of 5,000 or more or that had 5,000 resident electors or voters.  
All other municipal corporations are villages.  Id.  Pursuant to R.C. 703.06, on 
April 13, 2011, after the 2010 federal census, the Ohio Secretary of State 
classified 
Newton 
Falls 
as 
a 
village. 
 
See 
http://sos.state.oh.us/sos/mediacenter/2011/2011-04-13.aspx (accessed Aug. 24, 
2015).  Because Newton Falls is a village, Lange complied with the statute by 
filing the petition with the village clerk. 
{¶ 9} Second, King suggests that the initiative would affect two separate 
laws, in violation of R.C. 3519.01(A), which provides that an initiative petition 
may contain only one proposal of law.  However, R.C. Chapter 3519 applies only 
to statewide initiative and referendum petitions.  State ex rel. Sinay v. Sodders, 80 
Ohio St.3d 224, 228, 685 N.E.2d 754 (1997). 
{¶ 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’ 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
4
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. 
_________________________