Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Referendum Petition topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents say petition met signature threshold; organizers file Ohio Supreme Court action amid council resistance

Trenton City Council · August 7, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Petition organizers and residents at the Aug. 6 meeting said county election officials validated more than the required signatures for a charter amendment referendum and that they filed a case with the Ohio Supreme Court; several speakers urged the council to rescind recent votes to avoid legal spending.

Petition sponsors told Trenton City Council on Aug. 6 they gathered substantially more signatures than the charter threshold and that the county board of elections verified the counts; they said they filed a challenge with the Ohio Supreme Court after the council decided not to place the charter amendment on the ballot.

"The board of elections approved the number of signatures... They checked it with the county attorney," a petition speaker said during public comment. Organizers said they collected 334 signatures against a cited 128‑signature threshold described in the charter discussion, and they urged council to rescind recent ordinances rather than spend taxpayer money fighting residents in court.

Council members defended their procedural interpretation, citing differing charter and Ohio constitutional language about the definition of “elector” and filing deadlines. One council member said they reviewed the charter text and concluded the city must apply a specific provision that led to a vote not to place the petition on the ballot; another member said if sufficient validated signers who had voted in the last election had appeared, the outcome might have been different.

Residents at the meeting repeatedly stressed transparency concerns and urged council to avoid legal expenses on what they described as a citizens’ right to vote; the transcript records that the petition sponsors are pursuing remedies at the state level.