City leaders mull how to cope with residency ruling

CLEVELAND (AP) — City leaders have begun looking at their options as they cope with an Ohio Supreme Court decision throwing out municipal employee residency requirements.

Youngstown Mayor Jay Williams raised the possibility Thursday of overturning the ruling through a statewide ballot question to change the Ohio Constitution. He said there was widespread support in Youngstown for continuing to require that city workers live in town.

Police, firefighters and other municipal employees, however, applauded the residency ruling, which allows them to live where they choose.

Steve Loomis, president of the Cleveland police union, said Thursday that police and firefighters who pressed the court case would oppose any amendment drive.

Cleveland City Councilman Kevin Kelley said a drive to amend the Constitution would be costly and time-consuming.

And such a campaign would pit cities against their employees, including police and firefighters with broad public support, he said.

“I would rather not do that, but ultimately we represent the people and not a certain interest group,” he said.

A statewide drive takes a lot of petition signatures and money.

The current drive to get a casino-gambling proposal on the ballot in Ohio on Nov. 3 will require roughly 400,000 valid signatures by July 1. Payday lenders spent more than $18 million last fall in a losing Ohio ballot fight to overturn tough restrictions on the interest rates they can charge.

Parties in the residency case have 10 days to ask the Ohio Supreme Court to reconsider the matter. Akron Law Director Max Rothal doubted that route would work for cities because justices voted 5-2 to overturn the residency requirements.

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson gave no hint of fighting the ruling in a “Dear friends” letter released Thursday in which he said he was working to improve services and schools to make the city attractive.

“Many people have raised concerns regarding the potential negative impact this ruling will have on the city of Cleveland. Even though the Supreme Court decision is a disappointment, it does not deliver a death-blow to the city,” Jackson said.

John Read, a Cleveland attorney who has worked on municipal home-rule issues, said he doubted there was a federal constitutional issue that could get cities a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court to try to reverse the Ohio ruling.