Maple Hts: We Tried to Tell You But You Just Wouldn’t Listen

September 19, 2014

The poor, beleaguered politicians in Maple Hts. really thought they could keep the red light camera issue off the ballot in Maple Hts. We tried to tell you it wouldn’t work Maple Hts., but you just wouldn’t listen.

In a unanimous decision, the Ohio Supreme Court pointed out to the good politicians of Maple Hts. the Ohio Constitution makes it very clear that a citizen driven initiative has to be placed on the ballot. Live and learn, right fellas?


“Whether council delayed passage of an ordinance deliberately or negligently is not relevant,” the court said. “The Maple Heights City Council received verification of the signatures [on the petitions] more than two weeks before the constitutional deadline of Sept. 5 and conducted two regular council meetings in the interim.

“It’s failure to enact an ordinance at the second meeting fell well short of acting forthwith.”


Maybe they don’t understand the meaning of “forthwith?” The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines forthwith as “immediately,” as in “immediately.” So as not to confuse the reader, the dictionary uses this sentence as an example:


“The court ordered the company to cease operations forthwith.”


If you would like to read the definition of forthwith, check it out here.

If you would like to read the entire article on the dressing down the Ohio Supreme Court gave Maple Hts., check it out here.

For all the Ohio politicians out there, it is good to read the Ohio Constitution.

“But in its 6-0 ruling, the court said that the Ohio Constitution “imposes a ‘mandatory constitutional duty’ upon city councils to submit charter amendment initiatives ‘forthwith.’ ”


We would like to remind the Cleveland City Council that no matter how “distasteful” it was for you to put Issue 35 on the ballot in Cleveland for November, 2014, it was mandatory. As in mandatory.



Cleveland City Council Votes To Place Traffic Camera Issue on the Ballot

September 3, 2014

Cleveland City Council did the right thing on Wednesday, September 3, 2014, when they voted to place the traffic camera issue on the November, 2014 ballot. The entire article can be read here at

The entire process was just a formality. Ohio State Law mandates a citizen initiative be put on the ballot if the signatures are verified. (Apparently, Maple Hts. politicians don’t think they have to follow the law. Good luck with that one. You can catch up on that drama right here.)

Councilperson Joe Cimperman has the right idea:

“….because they do not do what they’re supposed to do. They were supposed to make life safer, sure they slow people down, but you see an increase in the number of rear end collisions and you see people speeding as soon as they pass the cameras,” said Cimperman.

We agree councilor!!