43
Husted ruling may nix Youngstown ballot proposal to ban fracking
YOUNGSTOWN
A decision by the secretary of state to remove anti-fracking charter amendment proposals from the Nov. 3 ballot in Athens, Fulton and Medina counties could derail a similar effort in Youngstown.
Secretary of State Jon Husted, a Republican, ruled Thursday in favor of protests filed with his office questioning the validity of the proposals in those three counties.
As part of his decision, Husted found the proposed provisions in each of the charters relating to oil and gas exploration represented an attempt to circumvent state law in a manner the courts already have found to be in violation of the Ohio Constitution.
“The issue of whether local communities can get around state laws on fracking has already been litigated,” Husted said. “Allowing these proposals to proceed will only serve a false promise that wastes taxpayers’ time and money and will eventually end in sending the charters to certain death in the courts.”
This decision could spell the demise of a proposed anti-fracking charter amendment in Youngstown.
FrackFree Mahoning Valley, which backed four previous failed fracking-ban ballot issues, turned in signed petitions Aug. 3 to put the measure in front of city voters Nov. 3 for a fifth time.
The proposal failed in both 2013 and 2014.
Sept. 4 is the deadline to submit charter-amendment proposals for this general election.
Susie Beiersdorfer, a FrackFree member, said, “They [government officials] are going to try whatever they can to get this off the ballot. I don’t have any concern right now. We’ll wait and see. This is unchartered territory.”
A group of local labor leaders and business owners said last month a Feb. 17 Ohio Supreme Court decision on the state constitution’s home-rule amendment doesn’t grant local governments the power to regulate oil and gas operations in their limits. State law gives that exclusive authority to state government, specifically the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.
Last month, Youngstown Mayor John A. McNally, a lawyer, said he interprets the court ruling differently, and that it would violate the city charter and state constitution not to permit the measure to be on the ballot.
On Thursday, McNally said he would have city Law Director Martin Hume review Husted’s decision “to see what steps the city could take. He will review Husted’s decision and determine if [Hume’s] opinion will change.”