Petitions aim to oust 4 from city council

CELINA - Petitions filed with the Mercer County Board of Elections this week seek a recall election of Celina City Council members June Scott, Mike Sovinski, Myron Buxton and Eric Lochtefeld, all of whom last week voted against legislation that would have outlawed abortion in Celina.

The petitions contain enough valid signatures to initiate the removal of the councilors by recall, per section 705.92 of Ohio Revised Code, board of elections director Kristi Rable confirmed Wednesday.

However, legal questions about whether Celina is a statutory or charter city - and how and if elected officials can be removed via recall - must be answered first before board of elections members can certify the petitions, said county assistant prosecutor Andy Hinders, the board's legal counsel.

This is the first time in at least nearly 40 years an attempt has been made to remove an elected official in the county by a recall election, said Hinders, who began working in the prosecutor's office in 1982.

"The Celina code doesn't make any reference to it so the question right now is with the city to determine what type of city (Celina is)," Hinders said. "That has an impact on the board's determination of the sufficiency of the petitions."

Stated grounds for removal of council members, per the petition language, are "disregarding the stated will of the majority of the residents of the City of Celina; sending the wrong message to the born children in Celina regarding the value of human life and the worthiness of the protection of life; putting unborn children at risk of being murdered within the city limits; and putting businesses at risk of having an abortion facility located next door to their place of business," the petition language reads.

When asked about efforts to recall him, Buxton said he doesn't know enough about what's going on to make a comment. Scott also said it's too early to issue a statement.

Sovinski said he wonders why the people looking to remove him from office don't put the same effort into trying to get on the ballot the issue of making Celina a sanctuary city for the unborn. Such a decision should not rest with seven members on council but the entire city electorate, he said.

In a text message to the newspaper, Lochtefeld said the next step in the recall process rests with the bipartisan board of elections members.

"I look forward to returning to normal city business - potholes, electric & water rates, attracting & retaining young people and city parks," he wrote.

Celina Mayor Jeff Hazel, when asked for a statement, said he is very concerned about the process of recall but since the issue is under legal review could not comment further.

"Any time there is a disruption in the political process … it certainly does have a negative influence on a cohesive council," he said when asked how this situation would affect council. "However, I do believe our council is committed to Celina and its legislative process."

A separate petition for removal through a recall election was filed for each council member.

The petition filers are Ken Lange, Tom Sanford and Sarah Bellman, Rable said. She did not have their addresses when contacted after office hours. Among the circulators of the petitions were Chad Stolly, Caroline Bange, Ashley Driggs, Jeremy Driggs, Sarah Bellman, Cole Stephens and Matthew Gray, all of whom listed Celina addresses.

Per section 705.92 of ORC, such a petition must contain signatures of electors in number to at least 15% of the total votes cast at the most recent regular municipal election.

Since Buxton is a ward councilman, only 43 signatures were required, Rable said. Of the 84 signatures submitted, 46 were deemed valid by Rable and office staff, she said.

"Because only people in that ward can sign," she said.

The other three councilors - Sovinski, Lochtefeld and Scott - are at-large members. Electors from throughout the city could sign petitions for their removal by recall, with a total of 116 signatures required for each of the three petitions. Rable said 148 valid signatures were obtained for the recall petition of Scott; 158 for Lochtefeld; and 156 for Sovinski.

But elections officials are questioning if and how section 705.92 of Ohio law applies to Celina and more specifically, whether Celina is a statutory or charter city.

According to the Ohio Secretary of States ballot questions and issues handbook, recall of municipal officials holding elective office is significantly limited.

The process is available only in a municipality whose voters have adopted both a form of limited home rule - a charter or one of the plans of government outlined in chapter 705 of ORC - and a recall process as part of that home rule government, the handbooks states.

"Recall is not available in a statutory municipality or in a limited home rule municipality that has not adopted the recall process," the handbook states.

The fundamental question comes down to what type of city Celina is, Hinders said, noting he's reached out to the city of Celina and the Ohio Secretary of State's office for information and guidance.

"We don't know quite which path to take. If there is a charter and the charter provides a method for recall, we would follow that," Hinders said. "If there is no method then we follow the (Ohio) revised code. So we wait to see what the city provides in the way of information on the basis for the laws of Celina."

City law director George Moore said he's spent much time looking into the matter this week.

"To the best of my knowledge, we have always been a statutory city that has never adopted a charter form of government," he said.

Asked whether section 705.92 of ORC cited in the petitions for removal of councilors by recall applies to "a statutory city that has never adopted a charter form of government," Moore said that question is up to the board of elections and the prosecutor's office to determine.

Rable said the next board of elections meeting would fall on Dec. 28. But since the office would be closed for the holidays at that time, she isn't sure if the meeting will proceed.

Should section 705.92 apply to Celina and the petitions be deemed sufficient and the four councilors do not resign within five days afterward, a recall election would need to be held at the next primary or general election occurring more than 90 days from the date of the finding of the sufficiency of the petitions, the law states.

That would open up another can of worms, as elections for city, township and county offices are held on a rotating cycle of years, Hinders said.

"When you say it's a municipal election and you say the next primary or general, does that mean the next one that comes up calendar-wise or does it mean the next one that comes up on the governmental entity rotation?" he asked.