State ex rel. Burech v. Belmont County Bd. of Elections
| Decision Date | 10 October 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-1369,85-1369 |
| Citation | 484 N.E.2d 153,19 Ohio St.3d 154,19 OBR 437 |
| Parties | , 19 O.B.R. 437 The STATE, ex rel. BURECH, v. BELMONT COUNTY BD. OF ELECTIONS, et al. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Carlile, Patchen, Murphy & Allison and Dennis Concilla, Columbus, for relator.
William Thomas, Pros. Atty., and Frank Pierce, Shadyside, for respondents.
Costine & Costine and J. Mark Costine, St. Clairsville, urging denial of writ for amicus curiae, Belmont County Tp. Ass'n.
Rankin M. Gibson Co., L.P.A., and Rankin M. Gibson, Columbus, urging allowance of writ for amicus curiae, County Com'rs Ass'n of Ohio.
IN PROHIBITION. 1
On April 10, 1985, the Belmont County Board of Commissioners levied permissive sales and use taxes pursuant to R.C. 5739.021 and 5741.021. Subsequently, petition papers for the repeal of the permissive tax were circulated. The petition papers were on form No. 6-L prescribed by the Secretary of State. The last paragraph of the printed form read: "The following is a full and correct copy of the title and text of the resolution sought to be repealed: * * *."
What followed, however, was not a resolution sought to be repealed, but a "resolution" by the Belmont County Trustees and Clerks Association demanding that the permissive tax be repealed, and requesting that the issue be placed on the ballot.
On August 23, 1985, relator, a resident and elector of Belmont County, filed a letter with the Belmont County Board of Elections protesting the validity of the referendum petition for the failure of the petition papers to recite the full and correct copy of the title and text of the resolution sought to be repealed. Later that day, the board decided to place the issue on the ballot for the November 5, 1985 general election in Belmont County, Ohio.
Relator then filed this action in prohibition against respondents, the Belmont County Board of Elections and its members, alleging that the petition is invalid for the failure of the petition papers to include the full and correct copy of the title and text of the resolution sought to be repealed; and requesting that a writ issue to prevent the referendum from being placed on the ballot.
R.C. 5739.022 authorizes an election, upon referendum petition, to repeal an emergency permissive sales tax levied by a county in accordance with R.C. 5739.021. The form of such a petition is prescribed by R.C. 305.32 as follows 2:
* * *" (Emphasis added.)
It is undisputed that the petition papers at issue herein did not contain the full and correct copy of the title and text of the resolution sought to be referred and were not in compliance with R.C. 305.32. Thus, relator contends that the petition is invalid and the issue cannot be placed on the ballot. His argument is well-founded. This court has consistently held that election statutes are mandatory and must be strictly complied with. Chevalier v. Brown (1985), 17 Ohio St.3d 61, 63, 477 N.E.2d 623; State, ex rel. Senn, v. Bd. of Elections (1977), 51 Ohio St.2d 173, 174, 367 N.E.2d 879 ; State, ex rel. Griffin, v. Krumholtz (1982), 70 Ohio St.2d 125, 127, 435 N.E.2d 1110 .
We do not agree with the assertion of respondents and amicus curiae Belmont County Township Association that the violation herein is a technical one as to form only and does not affect the petition's ability to fairly and substantially present the issue. The statute clearly requires that the full and correct copy of the title and text of the resolution be recited in the petition papers. This failure was in direct violation of statute and could easily be misleading to those who signed the petition.
Accordingly, we find that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Youngstown v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Elections
...Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections (1991), 60 Ohio St.3d 44, 46, 573 N.E.2d 596, 599; State ex rel. Burech v. Belmont Cty. Bd. of Elections (1985), 19 Ohio St.3d 154, 156, 19 OBR 437, 438, 484 N.E.2d 153, 155; cf. State ex rel. Barton v. Butler Cty. Bd. of Elections (1988), 39 Ohio St.3d 291, 5......
-
Stutzman v. Madison Cty. Bd. of Elections
...and correct copy of the title of the ordinance." Moreover, Stutzman's reliance on Esch and State ex rel. Burech v. Belmont Cty. Bd. of Elections (1985), 19 Ohio St.3d 154, 19 OBR 437, 484 N.E.2d 153, to claim that the referendum petition is fatally defective is misplaced. Esch involved an i......
-
State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. Louden
...v. Portage Cty. Bd. of Elections (1992), 64 Ohio St.3d 12, 591 N.E.2d 1194, 1195, fn. 1; State ex rel. Burech v. Belmont Cty. Bd. of Elections (1985), 19 Ohio St.3d 154, 19 OBR 437, 484 N.E.2d 153. Writs MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK and F.E. SWEENEY, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS and RESNICK, JJ., ......
-
State ex rel. Evans v. Blackwell, 2006-1781.
...Bogart v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 554, 621 N.E.2d 389, and State ex rel. Burech v. Belmont Cty. Bd. of Elections (1985), 19 Ohio St.3d 154, 19 OBR 437, 484 N.E.2d 153. {¶ 25} We have also previously granted writs of mandamus to compel the Secretary of State to s......