Chillicothe Red-Light and Speed Camera Referendum, 2009
Chillicothe Red-Light and Speed Camera Referendum was on the November 3, 2009 ballot in Ross County for voters in the City of Chillicothe. The referendum proposed prohibiting the use of both red-light and speed cameras within the city.[1]
On September 2, 2009, the Ross County Board of Elections ruled to keep the ballot measure on the November ballot, after the City of Cincinnati filed a protest against the ballot language. City officials argued that the language was "misleading" and "unconstitutional." James Mann, assistant law director, argued that the ordinance would not only affect the automated system but also the radar and speed enforcement used by officers on their patrols. However, the Citizens Against Photo Enforcement (CAPE) group said that Mann's argument was false. CAPE argued that its proposed ordinance affected only automated red-light and speed cameras, not those used by an officer. In addition to the ruling, the board noted, "Access to the ballot ... is one of the most fundamental rights an American can enjoy."[2]
Election result
| Chillicothe Red-Light and Speed Camera Referendum | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
 Yes
|
4826 | 71.56% | ||
| No | 1918 | 28.44% | ||
| Total votes | 6744 | 100.00% | ||
| Voter turnout | 0% | |||
Background
In November 2008 local residents and members of the Citizens Against Photo Enforcement (CAPE) group filed a lawsuit against the city's camera provider, Redflex Inc., requesting that camera enforcement be suspended. Soon after, in December, a temporary restraining order was issued requiring the city to suspend use of camera enforcement. However, the lawsuit was withdrawn in March 2009 after the suspension was lifted. The Chillicothe Red-Light and Speed Camera Referendum was proposed shortly thereafter.[3]
Noteworthy events
In August 2009, Chillicothe's assistant law director, James Mann, filed a protest on behalf of the city alleging that parts of the petition for referendum violated state law. According to the complaint, the referendum language was confusing and misleading to voters, and violated the Ohio and U.S. constitutions. The protest said the referendum was broad and took away power from police officers who patrolled roads and watched for people who ran red lights. Legal powers would also have been taken away from council members, according to the protest. Rebekah Valentich, the president of Citizens Against Photo Enforcement (CAPE), opposed the city’s protest, stating her organization would hire an attorney to keep the measure alive.[4]
Appeal to Ohio Supreme Court
Mann asked the city board of elections to conduct a quasi-judicial hearing on the issue and asked the Ohio Supreme Court to rule on whether the measure should be taken off the November ballot. On September 2, the board voted unanimously to keep the measure on the ballot, saying that while they may not have agreed with it, they still believed the voters should have the choice. Mann said he hoped the issue would move quickly through the court so that there would be a ruling before the election.[5]
Supreme Court ruling
Chillicothe Mayor Joe Sulzer asked the state's high court to review the case, stating that the initiative was unconstitutional and that the city was denied the chance to argue its case. He asked the court to approve an injunction on the referendum. However, in an October 21, 2009 decision, the court ruled that the referendum would appear on the November ballot. The justices found that "Chillicothe failed to act with the requisite diligence in asserting its claim for extraordinary relief in mandamus and prohibition. Instead, the city delayed filing its protest until 119 days after the signed initiative petition was filed with the city auditor and 56 days after the city auditor certified the initiative petition to the board of elections. Chillicothe delayed an additional 26 days after the board denied its protest and certified the initiative to the election ballot to file this action for extraordinary relief."[6]
Campaign finance reporting
The Ross County board of elections reportedly requested CAPE to file a campaign finance report for its red light referendum campaign. CAPE claimed that it was a grass roots organization, making many of its signs from members' own garages, and because it was not an organized political group, CAPE did not fall under Ohio's campaign finance laws. The board of elections reportedly had no evidence that CAPE spent any money on the campaign, but said if a complaint were filed against the group then it would be investigated.[7]
See also
- Toledo Red-Light Charter Amendment (2009)
- Ohio Supreme Court rules on Chillicothe speed camera referendum
Footnotes
- ↑ Chillicothe Gazette, "Red-light camera ban petition OK'd for ballot," August 25, 2009
- ↑ Chillicothe Gazette, "Board to keep red light issue on ballot," September 2, 2009
- ↑ Newark Advocate, "Chillicothe elections board to rule on putting red-light cameras on ballot," September 2, 2009
- ↑ Chillicothe Gazette, "C.A.P.E. vows to fight city protest," August 17, 2009
- ↑ Chillicothe Gazette, "City to appeal BOE's traffic-camera ruling," September 30, 2009
- ↑ The Newspaper, "Ohio Supreme Court Clears Anti-Speed Camera Referendum for Vote," October 22, 2009
- ↑ Chillicothe Gazette, "CAPE not happy with request for financials," December 9, 2009
| ||||||||||
