THIS IS THE LAST ISSUE FOR NEW POLITICAL LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. IN THE OCT. 31 ISSUE, ONLY LETTERS FROM CANDIDATES IN RESPONSE TO LETTER SPECIFICALLY CRITICAL OF THEM WILL BE ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION.
Vote NO on Issue 1
Issue 1 is a complex and highly partisan proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution. The messaging coming from the proponents of Issue 1 is very misleading.
Districting is the process of drawing and establishing U.S. congressional districts and Ohio state legislative districts. Issue 1 would create an entirely appointed “citizen” redistricting commission through a convoluted process. This means members of this commission would not be elected by or subject to removal by the voters of Ohio. Issue 1 would put the important role of redistricting into the hands of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. This would be a taxpayer-funded commission.
The state would also be forced to cover unlimited legal expenses for these bureaucrats and their paid consultants. The Ohio Office of Budget and Management estimates that Issue 1 would likely cost $5.7 million to operate in the first year. This is a bad deal for Ohio.
Gerrymandering is the manipulation of electoral borders designed to favor certain electoral outcomes. Issue 1 would not eliminate gerrymandering but would instead enshrine gerrymandering into the Ohio Constitution. This deceptive amendment is almost entirely funded by out-of-state special interest groups that have targeted Ohio to affect the outcomes of our elections.
I encourage all voters to fully read the lengthy ballot language before voting. The ballot language was prepared by the Ohio Ballot Board and approved by the Ohio Supreme Court. There are 10 points to the ballot language that summarize this massive and complex constitutional amendment. The first point factually states the proposed amendment would roll back constitutional protections against gerrymandering that almost three-quarters of Ohio voters approved in 2015 and 2018.
Issue 1 is well-planned and well-funded crooked politics!
Save Ohio! Vote NO!
Kathy Johnson
Chardon Township
What Issue 1 is Really About
Issue 1, known as the Citizens Not Politicians initiative, is on the Nov. 5 ballot in Ohio and will determine how future Ohio voting maps are drawn.
Currently, Ohio’s maps, drawn by the Ohio Redistricting Commission composed of seven politicians (five Republicans and two Democrats), have resulted in substantial Republican veto-proof supermajorities: 79% Republican in the Senate and 68% in the House, with 10 of 15 congressional seats also held by Republicans.
These supermajorities are disproportionate to Ohio voters’ preferences, which show a 56% to 43% split favoring Republicans over the last 10 cycles, including closer outcomes in the most recent Presidential and U.S. Senate elections.
If passed, Issue 1 will amend the Ohio Constitution to establish the Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission, consisting of 15 members: five Republicans, five Democrats and five Independents. This Commission would be responsible for drawing legislative and congressional maps starting with the 2026 elections, and at each decade thereafter based on census data.
The selection process for Commission members will be bipartisan, with the two Republican appointees on the Ohio Ballot Board choosing two retired Democratic judges and the two Democrats on the Board choosing two retired Republican judges to comprise the bipartisan Commission screening panel.
Importantly, politicians or lobbyists or their family members will not be eligible for appointment; all members will be ordinary citizens who have not held elected office or party positions in the last six years.
The amendment promotes transparency, requiring that all Commission meetings be public, including those held before and after map creation. It mandates the drawn maps cannot favor incumbents or any particular party.
Additionally, districts must aim to preserve Communities of Interest, which represent groups with shared ethnic, racial, social, cultural, geographic, environmental, socioeconomic, or historic interests, identities, or concerns. In contrast, the Chagrin Falls area is currently divided among three House districts, while the 5th Congressional district stretches from Cuyahoga County to the Indiana border.
For more than 40 years, the League of Women Voters of Ohio has advocated for fair district maps no matter what party or incumbent has benefitted from gerrymandering. We side with voters and advocate for a level playing field, where each vote is equal and not diluted through gerrymandering. Ohio voters deserve fair maps.
We endorse voting Yes on Issue 1 on or before Nov 5. Visit www.lwvohio.org for more information.
Carol Benton, President
League of Women Voters of Geauga
Spidalieri, Brakey Liberal Planners for NOACA
I am a Teddy Roosevelt conservative Republican, meaning I want to “conserve” our vital resources and not let them be sold overseas. Also, I want to see Geauga County remain rural as it is now. Our underground water is massive and clean. Our air is healthier than in Cuyahoga or Lake counties.
Spidalieri and crew sold an almost brand-new building a few hundred yards from the new county offices building. That building was our main senior center with a kitchen made for preparing home delivered meals, offices that could have been used since incompetent planning left the new building short of free space.
Now, Ralph wants to build a new senior center at 20 times the cost and half the size. Total incompetence.
Brakey thinks it is great that we regionalize with cash strapped Lake County (in the red). Also, when we regionalize don’t we lose our home rule and zoning to non-governmental agencies like NOACA?
Since Spidalieri has been in office he pushed for NOACA grants for Geauga with apartments linked directly to the grants. Isn’t it six grants in all Ralph? Six NOACA grants in our county plan and Ralph and Tim put them there. To be clear, NOACA grants involving apartments. That is something liberal planners do.
Along with his NOACA survey asking us if we wanted apartments, small lots and the RTA.
Again, all NOACA. With people like this claiming to be “good ole boys” like all of you patriots that are real, these guys are really good liberal ghetto planning actors pulling a big one on us all.
I will be voting for anyone but the Geauga GOP and their Liberal Ghetto Planners List.
If you want Geauga green and clean, don’t vote Tea Party.
Gary Paoletto
Chester Township
Issue 1: Vote Yes to Remove Partisan Gerrymandering
Ohio used to be a “bell-weather” state. We voted Democratic sometimes and Republican other times. But then came gerrymandering like we’ve never seen before and with it a Republican hold on the state that is unhealthy and imbalanced.
The language of Issue 1 as it is written on the ballot is deliberately confusing. It says that voting no is voting against gerrymandering. This is simply untrue.
To vote against gerrymandering in Ohio is to vote Yes on Issue 1.
Issue 1 will remove politicians from the redistricting process. Currently Ohio’s elected officials and lawmakers draw the maps. These maps directly impact them and their colleagues, so they are in no way impartial to this process and they have no incentive to create a more equitable system. Seven of these maps have been struck down as unconstitutional and as unfairly benefitting the GOP.
Former Supreme Court Justice Maureen O’Conner — who is a Republican — is the face of Citizens Not Politicians, the group that created Issue 1. She is committed to telling voters this amendment should be part of the law for our state.
Voting yes on Issue 1 would create a 15-member Ohio Citizens Redistricting Commission, made up of Republican, Democratic and Independent citizens who represent different geographic areas and demographics. It bans current or former politicians, political party officials, lobbyists and large political donors from sitting on the commission. The vetting process, though admittedly complex, is effective and well thought out.
Voting no on Issue 1 would keep the current setup. So how can the ballot language and signs say it stops gerrymandering? Answer: because the First Amendment allows politicians to word statements in any fashion they please, even if the statement is untrue.
The written ballot language is totally misleading. Secretary of State Frank LaRose wrote this language. It was finally approved after a legal dispute over its clarity and fairness and was ultimately approved by the Republican majority of the Ohio Supreme Court. So, Republican lawmakers are saying that gerrymandering will only be ended if we vote No on Issue 1 but the opposite would happen.
Many voters plan to read ballot language at the polls. But this is one time you cannot count on doing that in the voting booth and coming up with a fair or clear answer for yourself. Do get informed before voting on this critical issue.
Why are many Republicans working so hard to keep gerrymandering in place? The obvious answer is they want to retain their unfair advantage.
Please vote yes and get our state back to representing all voters fairly and equally.
Madelon Horvath
City of Chardon
Rambo is Best Choice for Judge
Matt Rambo, the Republican party endorsed candidate, is the best choice for Common Pleas Judge in Geauga County.
Those arguing this is a non-partisan race fear the baggage of their Democrat affiliation and deny common sense. Don’t fall for the Democrat Trapp; each candidate ran in a partisan primary; however, their party affiliation will not be listed on the ballot.
Rambo’s 17-year tenure in the legal profession puts him in the prime of his career to serve Geauga County for many years to come. His opponent will be an aged-out, one-term judge who will never have to answer to the voters for anything she has done.
Rambo also has more trial judge experience because his opponent has been an appellate judge which has completely different responsibilities.
Rambo’s opponent has stated there are no Democrat or Republican laws, so party affiliation is irrelevant. This is an interesting statement since she stated the Ohio Supreme Court has voted along party lines.
Rambo’s opponent also stated at a recent candidates’ night forum that she has been a lifelong Democrat and refuses to leave her party to continue to hold elected office. But she chooses to belong to the party whose U.S. Supreme Court candidate could not provide a definition of a woman.
Since the legislature voted a few years ago to put party affiliation on the ballot for judicial candidates in Ohio’s higher courts (but not at the county level), no Democrat judge has been elected or re-elected in the 11th District Court of Appeals, where Rambo’s opponent currently holds office. I believe she decided to run at the local level instead to try and fool the voters.
Don’t fall for the Democrat Trapp denying party affiliation and its effect on judicial outcomes. Geauga County deserves an experienced candidate who will answer to the voters, dedicate his career to the highest judicial standards and reflect the values of Geauga County. That person is the Republican-endorsed candidate Matt Rambo.
Stephanie Foucher
Chester Township
Yes on Issue 2 to Invest in Education
As a father of two Berkshire Badgers and a BLSD taxpayer, I believe that investing in our children’s education is the most important choice we can make.
Although my family, like yours, is experiencing the strain of inflation, increased property tax and the seemingly millions of other factors that are stretching our dollar, I will wholeheartedly vote in support of Issue 2 for Berkshire Schools and the RENEWAL of the Permanent Improvement Levy.
I believe that the annual $22 per $100,000 of my home’s appraised value is a relatively small price to pay for the quality of education my children receive. This has been a part of the property tax that me and my wife budget for in our personal finances since owning a home in the district.
This PI Levy has existed since its first successful passing in 1989 and has been successfully renewed every five years since. The renewal of this levy ensures that the school will continue to collect money that is specifically for the maintenance, enhancement and constantly vital security upgrades of our beautiful new campus, which it will always need.
If Issue 2 for Berkshire fails, the school will have to use general funds to cover the costs of said necessary maintenance and improvements. If the General Fund must cover the roughly $440,000 the PI Levy has collected annually, cuts that would affect educational resources that could directly impact the success of our students and staff would have to be analyzed and made.
We are seeing unprecedented increases in students requiring special needs and education, a birth rate explosion and consistently increasing enrollment into Berkshire. Though we are proud to be able to house and educate those special needs students and are excited to see the growing trend of having students attend our premier educational facility and all the career paths/college readiness programs we have to offer, that all takes financial support. The General Fund should be used for supporting those aspects of our district, not the PI levy the community decided upon in 1989.
I am voting Yes to continue this exciting expansion that Berkshire is seeing and to contribute to the passing of this PI Levy Renewal.
We all want what is best for our families, our schools, and our communities. I urge you to make your free voice known and vote, vote, vote! Not just for Issue 2 for Berkshire Schools, but for our local, state and nation’s sake. There is no question the results of the 2024 election cycle will shape this decade, and possibly, this generation.
Go Vote and Go Badgers!
Daniel Berman
Claridon Township
Issue 3: Kenston PI Levy Considerations
Unfortunately, the Kenston School Board did not accept the majority vote against this levy last fall.
The Geauga County Auditor and Budget Commission notified all property owners in the county of the huge increase in the State’s reappraisal and strongly suggested taxpayers request of local officials they lower their inside millage to help ease the burden on taxpayers.
The County Commissioners lowered their inside millage as did many townships and at least one school. Auburn Township, which shares the school system with Bainbridge, and the Kenston School Board chose not to alleviate this burden. They are running levies on the November ballot in addition to having received a substantial windfall in January 2024 due to the new property valuations. Kenston’s windfall amounted to $1.16 million (about the amount of the proposed levy).
Our state representative Demetriou’s office in Columbus told me last fall he was pursuing legislation that would change the way property valuations are calculated because they were unrealistically high. In checking back recently with his office, I found nothing has been accomplished yet and, if they do not pass legislation before year-end, the current valuations will stand for another year.
The same amount of windfall that Kenston and other entities received this past January will again be paid to them in January 2025. Our school will receive another $1.16 million without any vote by the residents and it could even be more for any new construction this year. To me, that translates to at least $2.32 million in new money Kenston can put in their improvement fund without the proposed levy and without a vote by taxpayers.
If our state legislators never get around to revising the way they do reappraisals, they will all continue to receive the windfall amounts they received in January 2024 and for many years ahead.
At the county Budget Commission hearing, by law required to approve the budgets of all political entities, school Treasurer Cales reported an unencumbered cash balance of over $15-plus million in their coffers. The Commission questioned Treasurer Cales why Kenston did not show any funds from the windfall transferred into an improvement fund while asking for a new levy. They also noted the school’s expenses “have been flat for the past three years.”
Kenston has been able to easily transfer $575,000 in each of those years from the general fund (which can be used for any expense) to an improvement fund but apparently its being stockpiled as unencumbered cash. Ohio law does now allow these entities to hoard money.
The previous superintendent, who was here just a few years, told us how our school system was starting a program to reduce expenses and closing one of the buildings due to low enrollment. We now have a new superintendent. With all due respect, I don’t believe this superintendent, this treasurer or this school board has given this the thought it deserves.
We are in the midst of an unsettling presidential election, inflation has soared the past few years, a national debt of over $33 trillion and many expert economists are warning of a severe recession coming, which leads me to believe the “school” is apparently frightfully unaware or chooses to ignore our present economic situation.
Their costly levy mailers do not mention the windfall they have already received and/or another to come in January. Are they trying to pull the wool over our eyes? They are certainly not being transparent and I don’t believe this is the way or the time to be less than honest with those of us who must financially support the school.
Linda Calvert Nokes
Auburn Township
