On at least three occasions during the past years, petitions have been submitted to the Clerk of Council that have not complied with the City Charter and some of the same individuals have been involved in all three petitions. 

"The fact that the same people keep making the same mistakes leaves one to wonder if the improper filings were done intentionally," said Akron Law Director Max Rothal.

On July 11, 2008, Rothal informed the petitioners’ committee that the petitions did not meet the clear provisions of the Charter.  (attachment: Rothal letter).  Although under no requirement to do so, Rothal gave the committee representatives the proper language of the affidavits that the Charter requires.  As has been done in the past, the committee representatives were clearly told the requirements of the law when they picked up the petitions from the Akron Clerk of Court on July 15, 2008. 

The Supreme Court of Ohio has, on several occasions, upheld the mandatory requirements of city charters concerning petition requirements. See State ex rel. Ditmars v. McSweeney, Clerk, 94 Ohio State 3d 472, State ex rel. Vickers v. Summit County Council, 97 Ohio State 3d 204, State ex rel. v. Dowling, 61 Ohio State 3d 55.  Section 21 of the Charter of the City of Akron, attached hereto.  

The Clerk of Council cannot ignore the mandates of the Charter. The Clerk must comply with the law. 

Rothal noted, "It is not too much to ask that the committee and the circulators of the petitions comply with the same mandates of the Charter."

The Clerk of Council will receive the petitions if they are filed today and will then review them to determine whether they have complied with the Charter and the laws of the State of Ohio as is routine. Once it has been determined that the petitions are in compliance with the Charter and the law, the Clerk of Council will forward them to the Summit County Board of Elections.