No surprise with SOS opinion; now fix the ORC
Lead Summary
By
Rory Ryan-hcpress@cinci.rr.com
After 34 days, it was good to see that Ohio secretary of state Frank LaRose (who’s nine months into his job) has weighed in on the residency issue of a write-in candidate for mayor of Hillsboro on Nov. 5.
Once through all the legalese, his letter to the Highland County Board of Elections boils down to this: Votes for the write-in candidate most likely will be counted.
That’s all well and good.
However, since the secretary referenced me in his letter to the board of elections, I’ll respond to this statement: “The minutes show that others, Rory Ryan and David Osborne, Jr., also questioned the candidate at the hearing. The minutes do not explain Messrs. Ryan and Osborne’s connection to the hearing, why they were not sworn in, why they could question the candidate or what process the board used to determine who would examine the candidate.”
For the record, I asked two questions during the open session of the Aug. 22 hearing, both of which were addressed to the board of elections or its legal counsel, Highland County Prosecutor Anneka Collins.
Given that there have been a fair variety of spellings on the surname and given name of the write-in candidate – including an Ohio court notation of same – I asked how many spelling variations of the candidate’s first and last name the board would accept.
After 40 years of voting, I think my name as an elector is supposed to match the board’s records. Perhaps that’s not the rule for candidates. I don’t know.
Board member Steve Hunter said the board would consider “the voter’s intent” on write-in ballots. Board member Kay Ayres said “I concur.”
In other words, the write-in votes will be like horseshoes and hand grenades in Hillsboro. Close counts.
My second question was directed to the board, but intercepted by its legal counsel.
Since the write-in candidate was recently employed by the city of Hillsboro, I asked Collins what address the candidate provided to the city of Hillsboro while he was employed by the city.
I was instructed by Collins to ask the question directly, to which the write-in candidate replied that it was a post office box in Franklin – no Hillsboro address. No surprise.
There you have it, secretary. I hope that answers your question. I cannot speak for Mr. Osborne’s inquiries. (Not that you were present, but the board and/or its counsel invited questions.)
On a second point, the secretary writes that “Rosemary Ryan filed a protest that claimed (the candidate) had not resided in Hillsboro for a year and is therefore statutorily unqualified to be its mayor. The board understood that the protestor (sic) was mistaken regarding the residency requirements for mayor of Hillsboro. However, the board proceeded to hold a hearing because a protest was filed.”
Perhaps the secretary is unaware that prior to the hearing, Mrs. Ryan submitted an amended and corrected Ohio Revised Code reference to the board.
Other issues addressed by the secretary include:
• There is no transcript, recording or approved minutes to review; only proposed minutes from the hearing.
• At the hearing, the board did not formally accept exhibits presented, take possession of them, or make copies of the exhibits.
Not that the esteemed members of the Highland County Board of Elections need me to come to their defense, but I think it is worth noting that the secretary of state’s office had a representative at the Aug. 22 hearing.
While I was not in attendance during the board’s executive session, I can say that I do not recall the secretary’s representative offering any advice whatsoever to the board during the open session. Perhaps that was not the representative’s role.
It would be interesting to know how many local elections boards and county prosecutors across Ohio are well-versed in the legal implications of such challenges to any candidate’s residency. My guess – just a guess, understand – not many are.
During my years as a college board of trustees’ member – and before – I had to attend annual ethics training sessions. One of the best state attorneys from the Ohio AG’s office used to ask this question: “Does it pass the smell test?”
This one doesn’t.
The takeaway for local elections boards seems to be this: Settle your issues in county to the best of your ability. (Political expedience, etc.)
* * *
Eyes wide shut
• Also this week, the following was posted on our site as my comment to the first visit to the Highland County Board of Elections by a sitting secretary of state in many years (according to two members of the board this week).
First, it was nice to see Secretary Frank LaRose visit the Highland County Board of Elections. Prior to his arrival, the board members present tried to remember the last time an Ohio secretary of state made such a visit to the local board. At best, if Dinah Phillips' memory is correct, it’s been more than a dozen years.
Second, it was disappointing that Secretary LaRose was not able to answer a question about the Aug. 22 residency challenge of a potential write-in candidate for mayor of Hillsboro for the Nov. 5 general election. After all, his office had a representative at the Aug. 22 hearing. To say he is being briefed on Sept. 24 – with a planned visit to the Highland County Board of Elections on Sept. 23 – seems more than politically expedient.
Obviously, he has since addressed the issue as most of us figured he would.
After posting my comments, I read a public email from Maggie Sheehan, LaRose’s deputy press secretary.
She wrote: “Thanks for coming today. Is there anyway (sic) you can put a new photo up? The one here has the secretary’s eyes closed.”
I replied: “I assume you're kidding, right?”
She replied: “No. Look at the photo that was uploaded…”
I replied: “Not to be intrusive at today's meeting, I took a grand total of two photos. The one posted is the better of the two. In 30 years of covering politicians, I can honestly say this may be one of the most vain requests – at taxpayers' expense – I've ever encountered.”
Apparently, there was not a lot going on at the secretary’s office on that fine first day of fall, I surmised.
It’s quite possible that Sheehan was acting on behalf of her boss. I can understand that. It is what it is. (Our tax dollars at work, of course. It’s all about priorities in politics.)
I’ll never claim to be a great photographer, but I have taken photos in the past 30 years of U.S. presidents, vice presidents, senators, House members of Congress, Ohio governors, assorted other federal, state and local officeholders and more professional, college and high school athletes than I can recall.
Not one of them has ever contacted me about his or her photograph. (Some people are more “image-conscious” than others, I suppose.)
I was also told by a public official that the secretary instructed the local elections board during his visit to discard anything with former secretary of state Jon Husted’s name. I’d rather not put the board of elections officials on the record, but if this is incorrect, please advise.
Meanwhile, in response to my Aug. 22 column headlined “It is time to amend ORC 733.02 to match ORC 733.24,” Ohio Sen. Bob Peterson said he is willing to work with State Rep. Shane Wilkin in looking at Ohio Revised Code updates.
As I said more than a month ago, I believe it is time for Highland County’s legislators in the General Assembly – State Rep. Shane Wilkin and State Sen. Bob Peterson – to work together and introduce legislation to update Ohio Revised Code 733.02, which states:
• “Mayor of city – election – term. The mayor of a city shall be elected for a term of four years, commencing on the first day of January next after his election. He (sic) shall be an elector of the city. Effective Date: 01-01-1967.”
I ask the General Assembly to introduce legislation to amend ORC 733.02 to read identical to ORC 733.24 (replacing "village" with "city," of course) – “Mayor of village – The mayor of a village shall be elected for a term of four years, commencing on the first day of January next after his election. He (sic) shall be an elector of the village and shall have resided in the village for at least one year immediately preceding his election.”
According to the state of Ohio, ORC 733.24 was amended on Oct. 17, 1985. It is my opinion that the state lawmakers should have amended ORC 733.02 at the same time.
After that column was published, Sen. Peterson wrote to me, saying, “It is especially interesting that this tie vote was not on party lines, which I expect is 99.9 percent of the decisions referred to the Secretary of State. With Shane (Rep. Wilkin), I will research your idea. Thanks for your thoughts.”
Thank you, Sen. Peterson. Perhaps the new secretary of state will be of some assistance. Might eliminate those masculine mayoral pronouns in the ORC, too, while you’re at it. Ohio’s had a lot of female mayors since 1967.
Rory Ryan is publisher and owner of The Highland County Press.
Once through all the legalese, his letter to the Highland County Board of Elections boils down to this: Votes for the write-in candidate most likely will be counted.
That’s all well and good.
However, since the secretary referenced me in his letter to the board of elections, I’ll respond to this statement: “The minutes show that others, Rory Ryan and David Osborne, Jr., also questioned the candidate at the hearing. The minutes do not explain Messrs. Ryan and Osborne’s connection to the hearing, why they were not sworn in, why they could question the candidate or what process the board used to determine who would examine the candidate.”
For the record, I asked two questions during the open session of the Aug. 22 hearing, both of which were addressed to the board of elections or its legal counsel, Highland County Prosecutor Anneka Collins.
Given that there have been a fair variety of spellings on the surname and given name of the write-in candidate – including an Ohio court notation of same – I asked how many spelling variations of the candidate’s first and last name the board would accept.
After 40 years of voting, I think my name as an elector is supposed to match the board’s records. Perhaps that’s not the rule for candidates. I don’t know.
Board member Steve Hunter said the board would consider “the voter’s intent” on write-in ballots. Board member Kay Ayres said “I concur.”
In other words, the write-in votes will be like horseshoes and hand grenades in Hillsboro. Close counts.
My second question was directed to the board, but intercepted by its legal counsel.
Since the write-in candidate was recently employed by the city of Hillsboro, I asked Collins what address the candidate provided to the city of Hillsboro while he was employed by the city.
I was instructed by Collins to ask the question directly, to which the write-in candidate replied that it was a post office box in Franklin – no Hillsboro address. No surprise.
There you have it, secretary. I hope that answers your question. I cannot speak for Mr. Osborne’s inquiries. (Not that you were present, but the board and/or its counsel invited questions.)
On a second point, the secretary writes that “Rosemary Ryan filed a protest that claimed (the candidate) had not resided in Hillsboro for a year and is therefore statutorily unqualified to be its mayor. The board understood that the protestor (sic) was mistaken regarding the residency requirements for mayor of Hillsboro. However, the board proceeded to hold a hearing because a protest was filed.”
Perhaps the secretary is unaware that prior to the hearing, Mrs. Ryan submitted an amended and corrected Ohio Revised Code reference to the board.
Other issues addressed by the secretary include:
• There is no transcript, recording or approved minutes to review; only proposed minutes from the hearing.
• At the hearing, the board did not formally accept exhibits presented, take possession of them, or make copies of the exhibits.
Not that the esteemed members of the Highland County Board of Elections need me to come to their defense, but I think it is worth noting that the secretary of state’s office had a representative at the Aug. 22 hearing.
While I was not in attendance during the board’s executive session, I can say that I do not recall the secretary’s representative offering any advice whatsoever to the board during the open session. Perhaps that was not the representative’s role.
It would be interesting to know how many local elections boards and county prosecutors across Ohio are well-versed in the legal implications of such challenges to any candidate’s residency. My guess – just a guess, understand – not many are.
During my years as a college board of trustees’ member – and before – I had to attend annual ethics training sessions. One of the best state attorneys from the Ohio AG’s office used to ask this question: “Does it pass the smell test?”
This one doesn’t.
The takeaway for local elections boards seems to be this: Settle your issues in county to the best of your ability. (Political expedience, etc.)
* * *
Eyes wide shut
• Also this week, the following was posted on our site as my comment to the first visit to the Highland County Board of Elections by a sitting secretary of state in many years (according to two members of the board this week).
First, it was nice to see Secretary Frank LaRose visit the Highland County Board of Elections. Prior to his arrival, the board members present tried to remember the last time an Ohio secretary of state made such a visit to the local board. At best, if Dinah Phillips' memory is correct, it’s been more than a dozen years.
Second, it was disappointing that Secretary LaRose was not able to answer a question about the Aug. 22 residency challenge of a potential write-in candidate for mayor of Hillsboro for the Nov. 5 general election. After all, his office had a representative at the Aug. 22 hearing. To say he is being briefed on Sept. 24 – with a planned visit to the Highland County Board of Elections on Sept. 23 – seems more than politically expedient.
Obviously, he has since addressed the issue as most of us figured he would.
After posting my comments, I read a public email from Maggie Sheehan, LaRose’s deputy press secretary.
She wrote: “Thanks for coming today. Is there anyway (sic) you can put a new photo up? The one here has the secretary’s eyes closed.”
I replied: “I assume you're kidding, right?”
She replied: “No. Look at the photo that was uploaded…”
I replied: “Not to be intrusive at today's meeting, I took a grand total of two photos. The one posted is the better of the two. In 30 years of covering politicians, I can honestly say this may be one of the most vain requests – at taxpayers' expense – I've ever encountered.”
Apparently, there was not a lot going on at the secretary’s office on that fine first day of fall, I surmised.
It’s quite possible that Sheehan was acting on behalf of her boss. I can understand that. It is what it is. (Our tax dollars at work, of course. It’s all about priorities in politics.)
I’ll never claim to be a great photographer, but I have taken photos in the past 30 years of U.S. presidents, vice presidents, senators, House members of Congress, Ohio governors, assorted other federal, state and local officeholders and more professional, college and high school athletes than I can recall.
Not one of them has ever contacted me about his or her photograph. (Some people are more “image-conscious” than others, I suppose.)
I was also told by a public official that the secretary instructed the local elections board during his visit to discard anything with former secretary of state Jon Husted’s name. I’d rather not put the board of elections officials on the record, but if this is incorrect, please advise.
Meanwhile, in response to my Aug. 22 column headlined “It is time to amend ORC 733.02 to match ORC 733.24,” Ohio Sen. Bob Peterson said he is willing to work with State Rep. Shane Wilkin in looking at Ohio Revised Code updates.
As I said more than a month ago, I believe it is time for Highland County’s legislators in the General Assembly – State Rep. Shane Wilkin and State Sen. Bob Peterson – to work together and introduce legislation to update Ohio Revised Code 733.02, which states:
• “Mayor of city – election – term. The mayor of a city shall be elected for a term of four years, commencing on the first day of January next after his election. He (sic) shall be an elector of the city. Effective Date: 01-01-1967.”
I ask the General Assembly to introduce legislation to amend ORC 733.02 to read identical to ORC 733.24 (replacing "village" with "city," of course) – “Mayor of village – The mayor of a village shall be elected for a term of four years, commencing on the first day of January next after his election. He (sic) shall be an elector of the village and shall have resided in the village for at least one year immediately preceding his election.”
According to the state of Ohio, ORC 733.24 was amended on Oct. 17, 1985. It is my opinion that the state lawmakers should have amended ORC 733.02 at the same time.
After that column was published, Sen. Peterson wrote to me, saying, “It is especially interesting that this tie vote was not on party lines, which I expect is 99.9 percent of the decisions referred to the Secretary of State. With Shane (Rep. Wilkin), I will research your idea. Thanks for your thoughts.”
Thank you, Sen. Peterson. Perhaps the new secretary of state will be of some assistance. Might eliminate those masculine mayoral pronouns in the ORC, too, while you’re at it. Ohio’s had a lot of female mayors since 1967.
Rory Ryan is publisher and owner of The Highland County Press.