Ohio

Ohio Supreme Court Rules Cities Cannot Enforce Residency as Condition of Employment

By Cleveland Law Library

Yesterday, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in Lima v. State that ORC sec. 9.481 is constitutional, and political subdivisions such as cities and townships cannot condition employment on residency. The case was actually a consolidated appeal by the cities of Akron and Lima, both of which had required employees who worked for their cities to live within their borders.   The Ohio Supreme Court struck down the residency requirements under Section 34, Article II of the Ohio Constitution, which Justice Pfeifer wrote gives the General Assembly the right to supercede home rule authority for the "general welfare" of public employees. Justice Lanzinger and Chief Justice Moyer wrote separate dissents, primarily commenting that the majority's decision was contrary to the doctrine of home rule. The Ohio Supreme Court's decision seems to contradict the City of Cleveland's successful appeal last Spring over Cleveland's residency rule.  Click here to read our prior post about the Supreme Court appeal by Lima and Akron.

Full post as published by Cleveland Law Library Weblog on June 11, 2009 (boomark / email).