SCO Will Rule on Residency Law

I'm a few days behind on this one but I couldn't pass up on the post. The Ohio Supreme Court will weigh in on municipal residency requirements by ruling on the state law that was created to prohibit them. The court will review two of the past cases one of which the city of Akron's case. From Wednesday's GONGWER report:

City Residency: Separately, the court unanimously agreed to decide the constitutionality of a state law that prohibits municipalities from requiring any of their workers, as a condition of employment, to reside within city limits.

Justices accepted appeals involving the cities of Lima and Akron, and said they would hear oral arguments in both cases on the same day. At the same time, the court rejected Akron's motion to consolidate its case with the one from Lima.

The 3^rd District Court of Appeals struck down the state residency law (SB82, 126^th General Assembly) in a December 2007 case involving Lima.

Earlier this year, the 9^th District followed suit in a decision that also lets cities continue to impose residency requirements on employees. (See Gongwer Ohio Report, February 26, 2008).

Last month, the 6^th District became the third appeals court to rule that municipalities may require their police, fire and other employees to reside within city limits, notwithstanding the new state lawto the contrary.

The 6^th District panel said in a 2-1 opinion that the state law prohibiting residency requirements was "an obvious attempt to circumvent constitutional municipal home rule authority."

I don't have a sense how the court leans when it comes to that thingy in the state constitution called home rule. I do have a notion that they are somwhat supportive of police and fire union interests. I know residency laws have held up in the previous court rulings but past performance is no indicator of future earnings when it comes to Ohio's top court.