Council Should Support the Charter Amendment

[Dan Alaimo]

Thanks. And to think of it, I've seen similar spin in past exchanges with this person. I'd drop a name, but I try to respect expected privacy when I can. But you are not off target.

[todd heckeler]

The Right to Vote Charter Amendment says, "No ordinance ... shall take effect until such ordinance is approved by a MAJORITY VOTE OF THE ELECTORS of the City of Lakewood at a general election."

Who are the electors? Majority is how many, over 50%?

NOWHERE, does the Charter Amendment say, "by a MAJORITY OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS."

Don't the people have to be registered to vote?

[Bridget Conant]

NEW FLASH!

It's no different than any other election. Majority wins. If 10,000 people vote, whoever gets the most (yes or no)wins. If 10 people vote and 7 want this change, they win.

What is so hard to understand?

[todd heckeler]

NEW FLASH!

It's no different than any other election. Majority wins. If 10,000 people vote, whoever gets the most (yes or no)wins. If 10 people vote and 7 want this change, they win.

What is so hard to understand?

Got ya, been a long day.

[todd heckeler]

Is there a section 2? That's I guess where it says majority of registered voters. Guess it will be read tonight in full.

[Dan Alaimo]

It's the whole sentence... "majority ... general election", not majority of eligible voters in the City. Thanks to Marguerite I was able to point out this misconception (a benefit of the doubt word) to the Build folks on Nextdoor.

I wish I was at the meeting, but Mondays are bad for me. I hope someone reports back on it later tonight.
Thanks,
Dan

[Jennifer Pae]

According to the Ohio Revised Code Section 3501.1(N): http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3501

(N) "Elector" or "qualified elector" means a person having the qualifications provided by law to be entitled to vote.

(O) "Voter" means an elector who votes at an election.

A voter is someone who votes in an election. An elector is a person who is registered to vote.

It is pretty clear in the language of the Charter Amendment, "No ordinance passed by Council, exercising any legislative authority with respect to Lakewood Hospital, that would cause Lakewood Hospital, in whole or in part, to no longer be a full time and full service hospital and medical facility providing, without limitation,inpatient diagnostic, medical, surgical, and psychiatric care for a continuous period than twenty -four hours, shall take effect until such ordinance is approved by a majority vote of the electors of the City of Lakewood at a general election"

The "majority vote of the electors" reads that its majority of all of those registered vote.

What if the voters approve a change per this Charter Amendment and the Right to Vote group does not like the outcome? Is that when you evoke the charter language to get the outcome you desire?

This is a poorly written (or was it?), confusing and deceptive law that will prove to cause more harm than good if passed.

[todd heckeler]

Thanks Jenn.

[Bridget Conant]

There is no such provision in Ohio law that calls for that.

Falsehoods are being spread.

[todd heckeler]

There is no such provision in Ohio law that calls for that.

Calls for... ? You mean the electors and voters? I see the difference now and the wording. Interesting stuff.

[Bridget Conant]

It's deliberate obfuscation by Pae et al.

Electors are those qualified to vote. Once you exercise that right you have become a voter.

See http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3513.01


What Pae and others are saying is rubbish. This is a straightforward ballot issue - you vote and a simple majority of votes decides the issue.

[todd heckeler]

It's deliberate obfuscation by Pae et al.

Electors are those qualified to vote. Once you exercise that right you have become a voter.

See http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3513.01


What Pae and others are saying is rubbish. This is a straightforward ballot issue - you vote and a simple majority of votes decides the issue.

The issue, the amendment issue, is a straightforward ballot issue, yes vote and majority decides. I think going forward if it's enacted is the real issue maybe it should have been worded better?

[Bridget Conant]

It's typical wording. The state of Ohio uses "elector" as "voter" in many parts of the ORC.

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3519

Referendum and initiative section - Its about insufficient petitions but it clearly shows voters are just electors who actually voted and a simple majority wins.

No measure submitted to the electors and receiving an affirmative majority of the votes cast on the measure shall be held ineffective or void on account of the insufficiency of the petitions by which such submission was procured.

[todd heckeler]

It's typical wording. The state of Ohio uses "elector" as "voter" in many parts of the ORC.

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3519

Referendum and initiative section - Its about insufficient petitions but it clearly shows voters are just electors who actually voted and a simple majority wins.

No measure submitted to the electors and receiving an affirmative majority of the votes cast on the measure shall be held ineffective or void on account of the insufficiency of the petitions by which such submission was procured.

I just question why voters wasn't used? Wouldn't it be clearer to use voters which has a particular definition and a different one than electors? Just curious.

[todd heckeler]

I also don't know a whole lot of the legal jargon but noticed that most references to electors is as far back as 1953 and as recently in 2006 in http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3519, but in http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3501 they defined electors in 2007, or at least updated it (Effective Date: 2002 HB445 12-23-2002; 05-02-2006; 2007 HB119 09-29-2007), to "Elector" or "qualified elector" means a person having the qualifications provided by law to be entitled to vote. Wondering if they had issues with the term electors in the past so needed a definition of it going forward?