Speed Trap Hunter Forum: Best Radar Detectors, Laser Jammers, Laser Detectors, Speed Cameras Forum  

Go Back   Speed Trap Hunter Forum: Best Radar Detectors, Laser Jammers, Laser Detectors, Speed Cameras Forum > Speed Trap & Traffic Enforcement > Economics & Politics
Radar Detectors Forum Logon:


Economics & Politics Discussion of the economic and political market driving factors of automated enforcement technology.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 2009-10-23
NMA Reporter NMA Reporter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 2008 Feb
Posts: 125
NMA Reporter is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Ohio Supreme Court Clears Anti-Speed Camera Referendum for Vote

Article: Ohio Supreme Court Clears Anti-Speed Camera Referendum for Vote

Rebekah ValentichChillicothe, Ohio residents will retain the right to vote out speed cameras on November 3 thanks to a Ohio Supreme Court ruling yesterday. Fearing the public would shut down his signature program, Chillicothe Mayor Joseph Sulzer had asked the high court for an emergency injunction blocking the citizen-led initiative. Sulzer argued that this step was needed because the proposed initiative was unconstitutional and the city was denied a fair chance to argue against it before the Ross County Board of Elections (view Sulzer's court filing). The supreme court justices unanimously rejected his complaint.

"Chillicothe failed to act with the requisite diligence in asserting its claim for extraordinary relief in mandamus and prohibition," the court explained. "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."

In previous election cases the court has thrown out challenges for delays as brief as nine days. The justices noted that the requirement that protests be timely is more than a mere formality because absentee ballots must be printed at least thirty-five days in advance of the election date. Sulzer's protest was filed just one day before that deadline, September 29. Hearing the merits of a challenge at such a late date would have prejudiced the other side's ability to prepare a compelling defense.

"Chillicothe has no legitimate excuse for its prolonged periods of delay in this case," the court concluded. "The city did not need to wait for certification of the petition to file its protest... Based on the foregoing, Chillicothe failed to exercise the diligence required of relators in election cases, and we deny the writs based on laches. By so holding, we need not address the city's claims."

Rebekah Valentich, head of Citizens Against Photo Enforcement (CAPE), expressed relief at the decision. CAPE volunteers gathered the required signatures to put the measure on the ballot.

"After reading the Supreme court ruling, I think that I can safely speak on behalf of every CAPE member who fought for the citizens of Chillicothe and their right to vote," Valentich told TheNewspaper. "Victory is sweet."

Valentich is confident the referendum will pass as voters have never approved the use of cameras in a public vote. CAPE members want to take the issue a step further and boot the city council members responsible for putting the program in place. At-large Councilman Dustin Proehl is the only incumbent who voted against cameras and, as a result, enjoys CAPE support.

The rest of the council, save for the sixth ward seat, is being challenged by opponents of automated ticketing machines. Valentich herself is running for the second ward seat. The other challengers include Beth Neal, who is running in the first ward, Dan Evans in the third ward, Larry Depew in the fourth ward, Jeremy Siberell in the fifth ward and Bruce Arnold, who is running for council president. Source
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ohio City Asks Supreme Court to Stop Camera Referendum NMA Reporter Economics & Politics 0 2009-10-03 16:09
US Supreme Court Upsets Speed Camera Industry NMA Reporter Economics & Politics 2 2009-08-02 18:11
Red Light Camera and Speed Camera CrimeLine NMA Reporter Economics & Politics 0 2009-01-07 22:11
Ohio Court Tosses Laser Speed Gun Readings NMA Reporter Economics & Politics 0 2008-04-30 23:14
Ohio Court Tosses Laser Speed Gun Readings NMA Reporter Economics & Politics 0 2008-04-30 23:14


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:01.


©2019 SpeedTrapHunter