Legal questions need answered

 

SOUTH POINT — A petition seeking to amend South Point’s zoning ordinance by ballot was filed Tuesday afternoon with the village’s clerk.

petition has 213 signatures, but must be validated by village and Board of Election officials before it can be approved for placement on the November general election ballot in South Point.

There are also a number of legal questions swirling around the petition as well as how proposed legislative changes to South Point’s ordinance, if approved in the coming months, might affect the ballot initiative.

The initiative petition was started and submitted by Joe Freeman, the owner of a former South Point Elementary School located on Washington Street in South Point. Freeman’s plans to develop the property into a multi-purpose building housing both senior condominiums and the offices of his home health care business has been the source of controversy in recent week.

A number of residents of the property’s surrounding neighborhood have been vocal opponents and have even gone so far as to lobby the village council to overhaul its zoning ordinance in order to prevent Freeman from using the building for commercial purposes.

A new proposed village zoning ordinance is in the works and will be the subject of a special village council meeting 6:30 p.m. Monday The proposal is expected to overhaul the current ordinance, parts of which date back to the 1980s and add further restrictions to uses in residential areas.

The proposed ballot initiative is aimed at Section 15 Article 6 of the current ordinance, which allows for “offices for physicians, surgeons, dentists and other health care professionals … providing there is written consent of sixty percent of the adjacent property owners…”

The proposed ballot measure would strip the 60 percent requirement for “areas north of Washington Avenue, south of Market Street, east of Ninth Street, and west of Route 52 that are zoned as residential district,” and allow property within that area to be used “for either religious services or professional office use of any kind, including, without limitation, the offices of physicians, surgeons, dentists and other health care providers such as optometrists, chiropodists, chiropractors, home health agencies, accountants, tax professionals, attorneys and architects” as long as requirements were met for off-street parking. The ballot measure would leave in place the 60 percent requirement for other areas within the village that are zoned residential.

Freeman said he has resorted to trying to change the law via a vote of residents due to the opposition of his adjacent neighbors to his proposal to house businesses in his property. He said he has the signatures of nine adjacent property owners who support his plans but needs 10. At this point, he said, it is unlikely he can get the tenth signature because of the controversy.

“I didn’t want to take this action. I’d rather the neighbors be reasonable,” he said. “All they will accept is the building to be torn down. In this age of recycling, wouldn’t it be better to recycle a $2 million dollar building?” he said.

But before the ballot initiative can move forward, the submitted petition must be certified to meet all the state requirements to be considered by voters.

According to Ohio Revised Code 731.28, the village clerk is required to hold the petition for 10 days before passing it along to the board of elections to verify the signatures.

Under state law, the petition must have the verified signatures of 10 percent of voters who cast ballots in the 2010 gubernatorial election.

According to Eric Bradshaw, deputy director of the Lawrence County Board of Elections, there were 1,178 votes cast by South Pointers in the 2010 election, so at least 118 of the signatures would need to be validated.

However, South Point Village Attorney Randy Lambert said there are other legal questions to be answered before the petition is sent to the board of elections for signature validation. He said the petition received at the Village on Tuesday “doesn’t have the proposed resolution attached to it.” “I’ll have to look and see if it is valid to send (to the board of elections),” he said.

Lambert said if there are some issue with the petition that makes it invalid, Freeman will still have plenty of time to make the corrections in time to resubmit it and be approved for the November election.

According to the Ohio law, proposed ballot measures must be certified at least 90 days prior to the general election.

There are also questions about whether the ballot initiative, seeking to reclassifying a specific area of the village is even a valid way to amend a zoning ordinance and what effect a council decision to adopt a new zoning ordinance ahead of November would have on the initiative.

“There is no specific guideline to follow, so that makes it difficult to look at and say this is how it needs to be done,” Lambert noted adding, “We may actually ask for an opinion from the attorney general, that is still a possibility because there is still plenty of time before it goes on the ballot.”

“We’re not trying to stop it we just want to make sure it is done right,” Lambert said.

Freeman expressed hope Tuesday that the ballot measure will not be necessary and that he will either get the last needed signature or village officials will make changes to the zoning ordinance that will allow him to move forward with his stated plans.

“I’m hoping reasonable minds will prevail and I will not have to worry about going this route but I had to protect my interest in this matter,” he said.

“We’re in waiting mode. We’ll see what they put on the table Monday. I’m hopeful I’ll be able to work with the council and the neighbors to reach a compromise so that I can use my building and increase property values,” he said.