Latest news with #HomeRuleAmendment
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals court says Ohio legislative effort to block local tobacco laws unconstitutional
An Ohio appeals court has unanimously decided that efforts by state lawmakers to prevent city governments from regulating tobacco products are unconstitutional. The Tenth District Court of Appeals, which covers Franklin County and hears many state government-related court cases, ruled July 8 that the Ohio General Assembly's attempt to bar Columbus and other cities from enacting their own rules about what types of tobacco products can be sold within their limits violated the Home Rule Amendment of the Ohio Constitution. Among other things, the Home Rule Amendment gives local governments the autonomy to enact ordinances related to the safety and welfare of their residents, including matters involving local police, sanitary, and other similar regulations, provided they don't contradict state laws. By 2023, Columbus and other cities had passed ordinances that regulated how flavored tobacco products were sold to snuff out swelling teen use of the products. The state legislature, in response, added an amendment state's 2023 budget bill to prevent cities from doing so. Gov. Mike DeWine twice vetoed the section, but state lawmakers voted to override the governor, in essence nullifying efforts by the cities. City Attorney Zach Klein's office filed a lawsuit against the state on behalf of Columbus and multiple other cities and municipalities in Ohio to prevent the law from taking effect. Klein, DeWine and others had argued for flavored tobacco bans, as well as limits on the sale of e-cigarettes, because of a rise in nicotine use among teenagers that threatened decades-long anti-tobacco efforts. The arguments also said sales of flavored tobacco, like menthol cigarettes, have targeted minorities and low-income people. Franklin County Common Pleas Court Judge Mark Serrott sided with the cities, saying the way the Ohio law is written violates the Ohio Constitution's provision that allows municipalities to govern themselves. The state appealed, and the Tenth District Appeals Court agreed with the cities. In a decision written by Judge David Leland, the appeals court said the state is trying to claim "exclusive power to regulate tobacco," which creates problems beyond where flavored tobacco is sold. "Cities would lose the power to enforce their tobacco laws, both criminal and civil. They would lose authority to keep city parks free of tobacco," Leland writes. "They could no longer regulate tobacco marketing. Licensing and zoning of convenience stores that sell tobacco products might be invalidated. Cities could do nothing to stem the sale of flavored tobacco products, no matter the addictive or mortal effects of the tobacco industry's targeted advertising to children or other demographic groups." Mayor Andrew J. Ginther told The Dispatch that he was encouraged by the decision. 'I'm glad the judges support the Ohio Constitution, that clearly states that home rule is a core principle of governing in this state. We have always said that local knows best,' Ginther said. 'The tobacco industry has disproportionately targeted young people, people of color and poor and disadvantaged communities and we feel like this is a smart and appropriate thing to do to protect kids. The governor stands with us on this.' The state can appeal the Tenth Court of Appeals decision to the Ohio Supreme Court. Steve Irwin, a spokesperson for Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, said Yost's office is reviewing the decision and will talk about what next steps may be taken. The district appeals court is comprised of eight judges, three of whom hear cases as a panel and rule at a time. All of those judges are Democrats. Six of the Ohio Supreme Court's seven justices are Republicans, with Justice Jennifer Brunner being the lone Democrat. (This story has been updated to include comments from public officials.) Dispatch reporter Jordan Laird contributed to this story. Reporter Bethany Bruner can be reached at bbruner@ or on Bluesky at @ This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Ohio court sides with cities in state tobacco law dispute
Yahoo
24-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Johnson County resident sues city, says new City Hall proposal breaks Kansas law
Just days after the Prairie Village City Council approved a proposal for a new municipal complex, one resident is suing the city to try to stop it. Marc Vianello filed a lawsuit in Johnson County District Court against Prairie Village — claiming that the municipal complex project violates a state law that requires cities to bring bond issues to a public vote. Last week, the City Council approved a $30 million proposal to build a new City Hall building at 7820 Mission Road to house city administrative staff and City Council and to renovate the current municipal building to accommodate the police department and municipal court. The project has become the latest in a series of issues that have caused uproar among residents in the northeast Johnson County city. The approval allows Prairie Village to move forward with pre-sale activities and prepare offering documents, but there would need to be a second approval to actually issue the bonds. Once issued, the city will commit to paying them off in a 30-year period. Prairie Village has an ordinance that officials say allow the city to finance a broad array of public improvements through general obligation bonds without voter approval. The local law, Charter Ordinance 28, exempts the city from a state law called the Home Rule Amendment, which requires cities to hold an election for bonds over $100,000 in any one year. City leaders first approved the local ordinance in 2016 when Prairie Village was looking at a $3.2 million street light purchase from Kansas City Power and Light (now Evergy). Vianello's lawsuit challenges that local ordinance, claiming that it violates the Kansas constitution and statutory requirements for a bond election. The lawsuit also claims that the city's previous reliance on the ordinance for other projects was illegal. 'Plaintiff (Vianello), a taxpayer in Prairie Village, will suffer irreparable harm if the City issues $30 million in bonds with out a public vote or without following the indebtedness limitations of K.S.A. 13-1024a, as this would deprive (Vianello) of his statutory right to vote, would increase tax burdens indefinitely and would risk indefinite fiscal instability; harms not adequately remedied by monetary damages,' the lawsuit stated. Vianello is asking the judge to issue a permanent injunction to prohibit Prairie Village from issuing the bonds under Charter Ordinance 28 and requests that the city put the question of issuing the bonds on the ballot instead. 'Mr. Vianello, like the vast majority of Prairie Village taxpayers, wants the City to follow the law and hold an election before issuing $30 million in general obligation bond debt that will cost the taxpayers for the next 30 years for this City Council's pet project,' Fritz Edmunds, Vianello's attorney, said in an emailed statement. The lawsuit claims that Prairie Village residents 'from all walks of life, all age groups, and all political persuasions overwhelmingly desire a vote on the City Council's plan to issue $30 million in general obligation bonds and new taxes to pay for the lame-duck City Council's pet project.' The lawsuit cited a survey sponsored by the Kansas Policy Institute, a conservative Wichita-based think tank, which shows that 85% of 435 residents polled want a vote on the City Hall project. However, four of the six ZIP codes that received the survey are outside of Prairie Village. According to reporting from the Johnson County Post, 149 of the 435 respondents live in the two Prairie Village ZIP Codes surveyed (66207 and 66208, which also covers Overland Park and Mission Hills). While some residents are concerned about the project's debt potentially driving their tax bills up, city staff have stated that there are no proposed increases to tax rates. Before the lawsuit, staff anticipated that the council would consider bids during its August 4 meeting and award construction contracts some time in October. Prairie Village officials said that the city doesn't provide comment on active litigation. Prairie Village lawsuit, city hall project by The Kansas City Star
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Leaders speak on ruling that cuts Metro Council in half
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WKRN) — On Tuesday, the state Court of Appeals found 'the Small Government Efficiency Act' constitutional and House Majority Leader William Lamberth applauded the decision. In 2023, the state legislature passed House Bill 48, which limited the number of metropolitan councilmembers to 20. The law was seen as retribution against Metro Council's decision not to support hosting the 2024 Republican National Convention. Last July, a Nashville court ruled that the law violated the Local Legislation Clause of the Home Rule Amendment to the state constitution. Mayor Freddie O'Connell and Metro Councilmembers celebrated the decision. The ruling prevented the law from going into effect. However, a three-judge panel in the state's Court of Appeals found the law to be constitutional and reversed the lower court ruling, allowing it to go into effect. PREVIOUS: Metro Council could be downsized following latest appeals court ruling Lamberth, who sponsored the House version of the law, added that Republicans would 'continue to cut waste at all levels of government' in a social media post Tuesday. Senator Bo Watson (R-Hixson) also applauded the ruling. '[The] ruling is a win for efficient and effective governing,' Watson said in a statement provided to News 2. 'The law places restrictions on the size of metro government councils and is intended to improve government efficiency – a key focus of conservatives in the Tennessee General Assembly. The Court of Appeals affirmed what we have always believed, that the legislature constitutionally has the authority and responsibility to ensure government continues to best serve Tennesseans.' News 2 spoke with attorney Brandon Smith, currently a partner at Holtzman Vogel and the former chief of staff for Tennessee Attorney General Johnathan Skrmetti, about the decision — and he said he agrees. 'When a city becomes ungovernable and turns to taxpayers for bailouts, someone has to put the brakes on,' Smith said. 'The efficiency found from a smaller council — Nashville's council is currently the third largest in the country, just behind Chicago and New York, and it's been this size since the county was officially consolidated in the early 60s. It's time for some needed change.' As of publication, Metro Council has 35 district members and five at-large members, which boils down to each district representing roughly 20,000 people. Some worry about what cutting that representation in half would look like — especially when considering largely-minority areas. 'I really think it's going to hurt those communities, but it's going to hurt all communities because you're going to have districts that are going to be combined,' Antoinette Lee, Metro Councilmember for District 33, told News 2. 'To me, a plus for Metro — you did not have to be rich or a lawyer or be well-endowed financially to be on the Council because you could work your regular job and you can do this. That is going to be very challenging now with huge areas.' 'Antioch bows to no council member': Some constituents call for Metro Councilmember's resignation following immigration remarks As of publication, Metro Councilmembers get paid $25,000 dollars each year. This move could mean having to pay council members to go full-time to cover larger districts. Vice Mayor Angie Henderson said the math all boils down to how many of the 20 council members will be 'at large.' 'Why this bill was filed at the state and kind of the process that we're going through — I personally feel that the kind of call for efficiency and effectiveness was somewhat specious,' Henderson told News 2. 'I do think it was targeted legislation and that we can't just say by virtue of our size that that's inherently a bad thing.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Tennessee court upholds law from Republican legislators to cut blue Nashville's council in half
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A Tennessee appeals court on Tuesday upheld the constitutionality of a law passed by the state's Republican-controlled legislature to punish the Democratic-leaning city of Nashville by slashing the size of its council. The 2023 law aims to cut Nashville's consolidated city-county governing council in half, from 40 members to 20. Although it was written to apply broadly statewide to both city and consolidated city-county governments, Nashville is the only Tennessee city meeting that definition with a council of more than 20 members. The law was one of several targeting Nashville after the council's rejection of efforts to host the 2024 Republican National Convention in Music City. The Tennessee Court of Appeals 2-1 ruling on Tuesday overturns an earlier split decision by a panel of judges at the trial court level that ruled in favor of the city. The law has been on hold pending appeals. Nashville attorneys argued that the law is unconstitutional because a provision of the Tennessee Constitution that limits local legislative bodies to 25 members explicitly exempts municipalities organized under a consolidated city-county government. The city also argued the law violates another section of the Tennessee Constitution known as the Home Rule Amendment that prevents the General Assembly from making laws that apply to a single county or municipality. In ruling against the city, the majority wrote that nothing in the Constitution explicitly prevents the General Assembly from 'imposing its own limit on the voting membership of a metropolitan council.' Given the fact that the judges must start from the assumption that state statutes are constitutional 'we cannot condone interpreting the Tennessee Constitution's silence such that the legislature's power is curtailed in this manner." In his dissent, Judge Kenny Armstrong argued his colleagues are misinterpreting the word 'exempt." 'While the Article contains no language to enjoin the General Assembly from limiting Metro's legislative body to any number over 25, the Article clearly precludes the General Assembly from limiting Metro's membership to any number less than 25,' he wrote. Armstrong did not address the Home Rule Amendment. The majority there found that even though Nashville is the only city that the law actually effects, it was written as a law of general application. Nashville has been mostly successful in challenging some of the other state laws taking aim at the city, although many of the cases are still in appeals. In one, a judicial panel ruled the state cannot enforce a law making it easier to pass changes through the metro council to the local fairgrounds speedway, which is being considered for upgrades in hopes of drawing a NASCAR race. A court panel likewise ruled it was unconstitutional for Tennessee lawmakers to pass a state takeover of Nashville International Airport's board. Judges also temporarily blocked a law that would reconfigure the group overseeing professional sports facilities in Nashville by letting state leaders pick six of its 13 board members. Republcan House Majority Leader William Lamberth issued a statement on Tuesday praising the court's ruling on the size of Nashville's council. 'I applaud the court's decision today affirming the constitutionality of the Small Government Efficiency Act. This action reins in excessive government growth while ensuring local municipalities across the Volunteer State remain accountable and responsive to their constituents," he wrote. Nashville Vice Mayor Angie E. Henderson said in a statement that the decision fails to respect the will of Nashville voters, who created a 'highly representative, local legislative branch.' Henderson said they will discuss next steps with the city's attorneys.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Metro Council could be downsized following latest appeals court ruling
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WKRN) — A three-judge panel in the state's Court of Appeals found a law that would cut the size of Metro Council in half is, in fact, constitutional. In 2023, the state legislature passed House Bill 48, which limited the number of metropolitan councilmembers to 20. The law was seen as retribution against Metro Council's decision not to support hosting the 2024 Republican National Convention. JULY 2024: State law reducing Metro Council size ruled unconstitutional Last July, a Nashville court ruled that the law violated the Local Legislation Clause of the Home Rule Amendment to the state constitution. Mayor Freddie O'Connell and Metro Councilmembers celebrated the decision. The ruling prevented the law from going into effect. However, a three-judge panel in the state's Court of Appeals found the law to be constitutional and reversed the lower court ruling, allowing it to go into effect. 'At its most fundamental level, this case represents a power struggle between State government and local government,' Tuesday's majority ruling reads, in part. 'I applaud the Court's decision today affirming the constitutionality of the Small Government Efficiency Act,' Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland) said in a social media post. 'This action reins in excessive government growth while ensuring local municipalities across the Volunteer State remain accountable and responsive to their constituents. Republicans will continue to cut waste at all levels of government.' Nashville could appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court. 'We are understandably disappointed and concerned about the ruling's implications on local sovereignty. But we are also encouraged by Judge Armstrong's compelling dissent,' Allison Bussell with Metro Legal told News 2 in a statement. 'We are digesting the ruling and considering our options.' ⏩ I am grateful to the Metro Department of Law for their expert argument before the Court of Appeals in March of this year to uphold the Charter of the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County on behalf of the voters and residents of Metro Nashville. Metro Nashville was first in the nation to fully consolidate a city and a county government, and in so doing, a 40-member, highly representative, local legislative branch was created by the voters. I am disappointed that today's Court of Appeals decision failed to respect the will of our voters. The Home Rule Amendment of the Tennessee Constitution, in part, stands for the proposition that the size of the Metro Council is a decision for the voters of Metro Nashville. The General Assembly's 2023 Small Government Efficiency Act was advanced purportedly to address the 'efficiency & effectiveness' of Nashville's legislative branch. For the last 60 years, this 40-member Council has capably and effectively served the interests of our constituents, who today number some 715,000. Over the course of this recent term, this Council has delivered numerous efficiency improvements, and we will continue to represent all Nashvillians to the best of our ability. I appreciate the dissenting opinion of Judge Armstrong and look forward to discussing our next steps with Metro's Department of Law. Statement from Vice Mayor Angie E. Henderson Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
