Ohioans For Concealed Carry - The Premier Gun Rights Organization in Ohio Since 1999 - New Cleveland Mayor vows to fight home rule challenges

What is this?

Featured Item

OFCC Gift Membership with commemorative lapel pin!

2009 OFCC Calendar

Upcoming Events

Deadline for Scholarship Applications
November 30, 2008

New Cleveland Mayor vows to fight home rule challenges

Written by Jeff Garvas

Thursday, 22 December 2005

A story on Newsnet5.com caught our attention today: "Jackson Says He'll Fight To Keep Cleveland Home Rule Intact"

Cleveland Mayor-elect Frank Jackson says he'll challenge any attempts to reform Cleveland ordinances that require city workers to actually live within the city limits. This issue isn't new in Cleveland, its been a goal of organized labor representing safety forces for many years. State law makers are apparently moving forward with legislation to rectify the situation.

The difference this time is the catlyst of the arguement, and its impact on gun owners in the months to come: Abusing Ohio's Home Rule provision of the Ohio Constitution.

(Click 'READ MORE' to continue)

What caught our attention most is that Frank Jackson isn't vowing to fight because he feels safety workers should be required to live in the city, but because he feels the city should be able to enact laws in it's own best interest through the home rule provision of the Ohio Constitution.

The home rule amendment of the Ohio Constitution gives local governments limited authority over three specific areas of law through local ordinances. The protection afforded by the amendment prevents the State of Ohio from superceding local ordinances in this limited scope. The website story referenced above gives the mistaken impression that a "home rule law" gives Cleveland the authority to force employees to live within the city.

It seems rather unfair that large cities like Cleveland require their employees to live within city limits. These policies would require a suburbanite to relocate into Cleveland and pay property taxes in order to accept a job offer with the city. Such a policy is unfair to families who have raise their kids in neighboring suburbs or have ties to community, churches, and school systems. At the same time, employees who worked within the city prior to this ordinance are grandfathered and exempted, and may live anywhere they choose. What harm are they causing the city?

Instead, city officials should pass an incentive program that either exempts the employees from a tax, or offers them a stipend for living within the city instead of demanding it as a condition of employment.

Cleveland is most likley reducing the number of qualified candidates that would apply for positions with the city. Some people may not have the option of moving if they're living with family outside of Cleveland city limits.

What is different with Jackson's stand on this issue from past administrations is the fact that he's focused on the home rule aspect more so than a desire to force people to live in Cleveland:
Jackson says he met with the State House speaker and vowed to fight any measure striking down the city's residency law.

"We are a chartered municipality with the right to pass laws that protect the health safety and welfare of our community, and this to us is a home rule issue and we believe the state of Ohio doesn't have the right to tell us what we can or cannot do," said Jackson.

Jackson insists he's not worried about where city workers would choose to live if the residency requirement were struck down, but rather the city's ability to enact laws in its own best interest.
When House Bill 347 is scheduled for more hearings in the Ohio House, you can rest assured that mayors like Frank Jackson, in coordination with the Ohio Municiple League, are likely going to come out of the wood work fighting statewide pre-emption efforts.

Statewide pre-emption would create consistent firearms laws statewide, and if implemented properly, prohibit and prevent local governments from passing or continuing conflicting ordinances.

These "charter cities" would love to take the Home Rule amendment of the Ohio Constitution to the greatest of extremes to pass laws that make state issued licenses (such as concealed handgun licenses) invalid or unrecognized by local law enforcement. The City of Toledo is already trying this, as is the City of Clyde. (Where OFCC is currently awaiting a ruling in a Sandusky court)

There are some issues that local government should have authority over, such as direction over local law enforcement, local sewers, and the areas of law that the Home Rule Amendment intended local government to maintain authority over.

However, the Home Rule amendment should not be abused by local governments to counter statewide initiatives to create consistent laws statewide. This doesn't just apply to firearms laws, which in Ohio appear like a patchwork quilt of conflict and confusion.

Imagine a state where every locality has different motor vehicle laws, or where every locality has different laws on driving under the influence.

In order for law abiding people to comply with laws it is neccesary for those people to be reasonable capable of understanding them. In Ohio, gun laws change every time you enter a different city, village or township.

Written by Jeff Garvas
Thursday, 22 December 2005
A story on Newsnet5.com caught our attention today: "Jackson Says He'll Fight To Keep Cleveland Home Rule Intact" Cleveland Mayor-elect Frank Jackson says he'll challenge any attempts to reform Cleveland ordinances that require city workers to actually live within the city limits. This issue isn't new in Cleveland, its been a goal of organized labor representing safety forces for many years. State law makers are apparently moving forward with legislation to rectify the situation. The difference this time is the catlyst of the arguement, and its impact on gun owners in the months to come: Abusing Ohio's Home Rule provision of the Ohio Constitution. (Click 'READ MORE' to continue) What caught our attention most is that Frank Jackson isn't vowing to fight because he feels safety workers should be required to live in the city, but because he feels the city should be able to enact laws in it's own best interest through the home rule provision of the Ohio Constitution. The home rule amendment of the Ohio Constitution gives local governments limited authority over three specific areas of law through local ordinances. The protection afforded by the amendment prevents the State of Ohio from superceding local ordinances in this limited scope. The website story referenced above gives the mistaken impression that a "home rule law" gives Cleveland the authority to force employees to live within the city. It seems rather unfair that large cities like Cleveland require their employees to live within city limits. These policies would require a suburbanite to relocate into Cleveland and pay property taxes in order to accept a job offer with the city. Such a policy is unfair to families who have raise their kids in neighboring suburbs or have ties to community, churches, and school systems. At the same time, employees who worked within the city prior to this ordinance are grandfathered and exempted, and may live anywhere they choose. What harm are they causing the city? Instead, city officials should pass an incentive program that either exempts the employees from a tax, or offers them a stipend for living within the city instead of demanding it as a condition of employment. Cleveland is most likley reducing the number of qualified candidates that would apply for positions with the city. Some people may not have the option of moving if they're living with family outside of Cleveland city limits. What is different with Jackson's stand on this issue from past administrations is the fact that he's focused on the home rule aspect more so than a desire to force people to live in Cleveland: Jackson says he met with the State House speaker and vowed to fight any measure striking down the city's residency law. "We are a chartered municipality with the right to pass laws that protect the health safety and welfare of our community, and this to us is a home rule issue and we believe the state of Ohio doesn't have the right to tell us what we can or cannot do," said Jackson. Jackson insists he's not worried about where city workers would choose to live if the residency requirement were struck down, but rather the city's ability to enact laws in its own best interest. When House Bill 347 is scheduled for more hearings in the Ohio House, you can rest assured that mayors like Frank Jackson, in coordination with the Ohio Municiple League, are likely going to come out of the wood work fighting statewide pre-emption efforts. Statewide pre-emption would create consistent firearms laws statewide, and if implemented properly, prohibit and prevent local governments from passing or continuing conflicting ordinances. These "charter cities" would love to take the Home Rule amendment of the Ohio Constitution to the greatest of extremes to pass laws that make state issued licenses (such as concealed handgun licenses) invalid or unrecognized by local law enforcement. The City of Toledo is already trying this, as is the City of Clyde. (Where OFCC is currently awaiting a ruling in a Sandusky court) There are some issues that local government should have authority over, such as direction over local law enforcement, local sewers, and the areas of law that the Home Rule Amendment intended local government to maintain authority over. However, the Home Rule amendment should not be abused by local governments to counter statewide initiatives to create consistent laws statewide. This doesn't just apply to firearms laws, which in Ohio appear like a patchwork quilt of conflict and confusion. Imagine a state where every locality has different motor vehicle laws, or where every locality has different laws on driving under the influence. In order for law abiding people to comply with laws it is neccesary for those people to be reasonable capable of understanding them. In Ohio, gun laws change every time you enter a different city, village or township.

Get Involved

Services

More Information

Featured Item

Upcoming Events