Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Blogs:
Pets:
Sunburn in canines and felines
The Heldenfiles:
Monday Notebook, New "90210" on DVD
Patrick McManamon:
Another NBA free agent goes to a Cavs competitor
Akron Zips:
Opponent outlook: Northern Illinois
Browns Bulletin:
Single-game ticket sales begin July 11
Tribe Matters:
Marte is IL’s Batter of the Week
Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth test showed marijuana
Kent State Sports:
Men's Basketball Scheduling update
Cleveland Cavaliers:
Free Agency Update: Frye in View?
All Da King's Men:
The Obligatory Palin Post
Blog of Mass Destruction:
The "Limbaugh Babies"
Akron Law Café:
The Veil and the Burqa – Constitutional to Ban or Restrict?
Varsity Letters:
Solon’s Baldwin could decide soon
See Jane Style:
Picnic Wear
Car Chase:
Where do We Go from Here?
Let's Talk Real Estate:
ID My Bug
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Jennifer inquires about a bus tour to Atlantic City
Sound Check:
Rundgren fans rejoice!: Second night of AWATS at The Civic added
HRLite House:
DDI One of Best Places to Work
Akron Gamer:
Hot link: Best of Nintendo at E3
Published on Thursday, Apr 03, 2008
As law director for the city of Akron, I think it is important that I clarify for our citizens a city ordinance concerning campaign contribution limits that, on occasion, receives attention in news stories in the Beacon Journal.
Most of the time, the impression left by these accounts is, in my opinion, misleading.
There is no gray area in this; nothing is left open for interpretation, and the ordinance has passed muster in U.S. District Court.
Further, this law has been in effect in Akron since Jan. 24, 2003. Yet, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) continues to complain that candidates, including Mayor Don Plusquellic, are not following the law.
This statement, as it concerns Plusquellic, is untrue and irresponsible.
The law at issue pertains to how much money candidates for city offices can raise for their campaign from individual donors.
On March 14, the Beacon Journal published an article (''Group protests mayor's election funds'') concerning the fund raising of Plusquellic for his 2007 primary campaign and his general election campaign. Some of what the article should have included and explained are:
Section 30.11 in our Code of Ordinances, which reads:
''CONTRIBUTION LIMITS
(C) No candidate for Mayor shall accept aggregate contributions per election from an individual person, political party, campaign committee, political action committee or political contributing entity in excess of $300.''
Most important to this article would have been to underscore Section 30.10 (f) dealing with the definition of the word ''election.'' The law clearly reads that fund raising within the limits specified above is legal in each election: primary and general.
Section 30.10 reads in part:
'' 'Per Election' means for each general election, primary election, special election, and/or runoff election in which a candidate's name appears on the ballot or in which the candidate has filed at the Summit County Board of Elections a declaration of intent to run as a write-in candidate.''
Mayor Plusquellic was clearly a candidate in the primary election and in the general election. The law allows him to accept contributions of $300 for the primary election and $300 for the general election.
For the AFSC to continually assert that this is not permitted under the law is patently wrong, and to continue to report these unfounded statements is irresponsible on the part of the newspaper.
Max Rothal
Akron
Cleaner air
at what cost?
I heard recently that the Environmental Protection Agency wants to change the formulation of our gasoline to make it ''cleaner.''
Do I have to even spend five minutes imagining what that would do to the price of gasoline?
We have just struggled with $3.49 a gallon for gasoline. What would we do if it suddenly shot to more than $4? The entire area would come to a shuddering halt, and the price of everything else would shoot straight through the roof. I can imagine the freeways becoming busy with people leaving the area for good.
The air would become cleaner, yes, but only because nobody would be left to pollute it. Or is that what the EPA is after, an empty Northeast Ohio?
Hello, EPA, the pollution you are finding was made in China, not here in good ol' Northeast Ohio.
Jenny Ray
Barberton
Get the full article here.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
