![]() “I don’t know how they can elevate it, but I heard some of the things and they’re doing everything they can.”ĭon Padgett III, the tournament’s executive director, said the new partnership with Kaulig Companies brings new opportunities. “Anytime you get a new company in, they are going to do everything they can to put their stamp on the golf tournament and try to elevate it,” Kelly said. When the tournament sponsorship became available, we had to jump all over it.”ĭefending champion Jerry Kelly will be among the top 50-and-over golfers from across the world who will be playing in the tournament. We decided to get involved just because we love Akron and love Northeast Ohio. “We’ve been playing 70 years of tournament golf here at Firestone. Haley BeMiller is a reporter for the USA TODAY Network Ohio Bureau, which serves the Columbus Dispatch, Cincinnati Enquirer, Akron Beacon Journal and 18 other affiliated news organizations across Ohio.“We couldn’t be more excited to be part of this championship,” he said. "Of course the word elevating does not mean amending or changing. "He could have written the title to be fair for all voters," state Sen. LaRose said his office alone is responsible for the title, not the board. Democrats on the Ballot Board tried to make those revisions, with no success. The language also does not explain the current voter threshold for amending the constitution. Republican justices maintained large parts of the original draft that the coalition said are incomplete and designed to persuade voters to support Issue 1.įor example, the title still includes the phrase "elevating the standards," which critics say is biased. Opponents also used Tuesday's meeting to request changes not ordered by the court. Issue 1 critics call ballot language title unfair McTigue declined to say Tuesday whether more legal challenges are coming, but he plans to discuss options with his clients. He proposed additional tweaks to the phrasing − rejected by the board − that he said would further clarify the signature requirements and improve the title. LaRose said his office believes the changes comply with the court ruling.īut attorney Don McTigue, who represents the coalition, wasn't so sure. Republicans on the Ballot Board accepted new language from Secretary of State Frank LaRose's office that scrapped "any" from the title and corrected the signature rule. Justices said the word "any" incorrectly suggested that the signature changes would apply to all amendments, when they apply only to citizen-initiated proposals. The previous title for the issue − "Elevating the standards to qualify for and to pass any constitutional amendment" − could mislead voters.(It said groups have to gather signatures from 5% of "all electors" in 88 counties, but it's actually 5% of voters from the last gubernatorial election − which is a smaller number.) The language incorrectly described how many signatures citizens need to collect for proposed amendments.A 4-3 Republican majority on the state Supreme Court agreed with the group on two counts and determined: The One Person One Vote coalition, joined by three Ohio voters, argued in a lawsuit that the previous language was inaccurate and misleading. 8 election whether it should take 60% of the vote to amend the constitution, instead of a simple majority of 50% plus one. The move came one day after the Ohio Supreme Court ordered the GOP-controlled board to correct errors in the original language for the ballot question, known as Issue 1. The Ohio Ballot Board on Tuesday approved a rewrite of ballot language for the August issue that would make it harder to change Ohio's Constitution.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |