PATA History Pages

Diley Rd. Referendum Press Release/City of Pickerington

Referendum Rejected

From the City of Pickerington

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 18, 2004


Diley Road Referendum Ruled Invalid

At the request of the City of Pickerington, the law firms of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P. and The Brunner Firm Co., LPA reviewed the referendum on City of Pickerington Resolution 2004-17R dealing with the Diley Road widening project. The purpose of retaining these firms was to evaluate the legal issues involved in sending the referendum to the ballot in the general election of November 8, 2005.

Based on Ohio Revised Code (ORC), both law firms are of the opinion that the Diley Road widening project is not subject to review by referendum. The basis of this opinion is an ORC provision which states that if the legislative authority of a city is required to enact more than one ordinance to complete the legislation necessary for a public improvement, the power of referendum applies only to the first ordinance to be passed, and not to any subsequent measures.

The City of Pickerington has entered into various contracts with respect to the Diley Road widening project, including: 1) the purchase of certain property to accommodate construction, and 2) engineering and design contracts to provide the necessary design and construction plans. In fact, the ordinance that is the subject of the referendum is the ninth subsequent ordinance or resolution passed by the City which affects or deals with the Diley Road project.

“A referendum or initiative petition cannot repeal existing legislation concerning partially completed improvement projects because such an action substantially impairs the City’s contractual obligations, and is therefore unconstitutional” according to William M. Todd of Squire, Sanders & Dempsey.

In making her decision not to certify the referendum for the ballot, Pickerington’s Finance Director Linda Fersch stated, “We have sought two independent opinions from well respected law firms concerning the legality of bringing this referendum to the November ballot. Both firms concluded that the referendum clearly fails to satisfy the requirements of the Ohio Revised Code, and is invalid as a matter of law. Because the first duty of government is to uphold the law, I cannot certify the Diley Road referendum.”