Container Top
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
Search

Events Calendar

EVENT SEARCH:

In This Section


Most Read Stories


Blogs:


Pets:
Not 101 Dalmations…but close!

The Heldenfiles:
Friday Notebook

Patrick McManamon:
Saturday entertainment, one more time …

Akron Zips:
No. 1 UA soccer remains perfect, Zips football defeats rival Flashes

Tribe Matters:
Tribe makes roster moves

Cleveland Browns:
Lewis doesn't like boycott

Kent State Sports:
Kent State falls to Akron, 20-28

Cleveland Cavaliers:
Gameblog: Cavs at Knicks

Buckeye Blogging:
Weekly ‘B’ Deck Report – New Mexico St.

Varsity Letters:
Wrestling, bowling teams prepare for season

All Da King's Men:
Bigger And Better Boondoggles

Blog of Mass Destruction:
The Shooter

Akron Law Café:
NEW U.S. Supreme Court Database

See Jane Style:
Muffle Your Muffler

Car Chase:
Perfect Weather for an Autumn Drive

Let's Talk Real Estate:
RUMORS: Downtown Restaurant Explosion

Ohio Travels with Betty:
Jack is looking for a trip to Southern Ohio the week of November 16.

Sound Check:
The Black Keys to perform benefit concert at Musica on November 27

HRLite House:
Personal Rant – Why People Do Not Live in Northeast Ohio

Akron Gamer:
New 'Call of Duty' could set entertainment record

No on Issue 3

Why not bolster property rights? Consider the fine print

Published on Friday, Oct 24, 2008

Look at the language of state Issue 3, and the proposal appears harmless, an amendment to the Ohio Constitution that would reinforce the rights of property owners to make reasonable use of the water that runs through and beneath their land. The proposal surfaced as part of a compromise to win legislative approval of the Great Lakes Compact. The Republican majority in the Senate insisted that the ballot issue come with its support.

An argument for the measure holds the amendment merely would restate protections already established by the courts and contained in the compact. The truth is, that contention amounts to an even stronger argument against approval. The amendment is unnecessary.

Why include in the state constitution part of a political deal struck quickly and late in the process?

Consider opaque and problematic language lurking in the amendment, a provision maintaining that private property rights would not be limited by other sections of the constitution, including those covering the management of natural resources and home rule for local governments. All of that may reflect needless concern. Then again, here is an amendment that carries openings for unintended consequences.

We recommend a ''no'' vote on Issue 3 on Nov. 4.

Look at the language of state Issue 3, and the proposal appears harmless, an amendment to the Ohio Constitution that would reinforce the rights of property owners to make reasonable use of the water that runs through and beneath their land. The proposal surfaced as part of a compromise to win legislative approval of the Great Lakes Compact. The Republican majority in the Senate insisted that the ballot issue come with its support.

Get the full article here.


Story tools

Email  Email   Print  Print   Save  Save   Reprint  Reprint   Popular  Most Popular   Reprint  Subscribe

Share this story

AddThis Social Bookmark Button















Most Commented Stories