The Ohio Supreme Court will allow for a special election to let Trenton residents vote on the future of data centers in the city.
The decision was released by the Ohio Supreme Court on Tuesday. WCPO previously reported that a group of petitioners, named the Woodsdale and Trenton Environmental Resistance (WATER), were trying to advance a city amendment to ban data centers.
WATER's proposed amendment aims to prohibit new data centers larger than 25 megawatts from being built within city limits.
We talked to WATER Co-founder Lorie Blankenship and asked her how she felt in the wake of a victory before Ohio's highest court.
"Elated," she said. "I've probably been crying all day."
Lorie and her husband Barry Blankenship have been leading the charge against data centers in the Butler County area and pledged to drive voters to the polls whenever the special election is called.
"We've been in this since last year when we found out that a data center was coming to town, and we will be on it until the very end," Lorie said.
WATCH: We break down the lawsuit before the Ohio Supreme Court
After gathering 336 signatures, they had their initiative rejected by city council, which initially argued that the group needed around 820 signatures for the amendment process to proceed. City council voted 4-3 to reject the initiative.
This decision sparked debate over whether the group needed to meet the threshold based on the city’s number of registered voters or the number of ballots cast in the last municipal election.
Trenton attorney Nick Ziepfel laid out the options before city council at the special meeting:
- Decide that the term "electors" in the city charter referred to all registered voters active during the previous election cycle, requiring the petitioners to gather 820 valid signatures to get the initiative before voters.
- Decide that the term "electors" in the city charter referred to all voters who cast a ballot in the previous election, requiring petitioners to gather 128 valid signatures to get the initiative before voters.
The city council's decision prompted the group to take the case to the Ohio Supreme Court, resulting in an expedited special election case being opened.
WATCH: Prologis pitches their data center to the public
The Butler County Board of Elections determined 128 signatures were sufficient to get the measure on the ballot, based on advice from the Butler County Prosecuting Attorney Mike Gmoser.
We talked with Gmoser in his office soon after the ruling came down, and he told us he wasn't surprised.
"Anybody is free to review it as long as they choose to, but in my opinion, it's not going to make a tinker's damn bit of difference to the outcome. The Supreme Court has spoken. Period."
Gmoser called the ruling a good thing for democracy and said it should send a message to other municipalities who would consider using a broader definition of "elector" to reject ballot initiatives.
"My hopes for them, obviously I don't represent them, but I think everybody might want to think twice before going against the grain in a concrete, well reasoned decision from the Ohio Supreme Court," he said.
The state supreme court ruled that charter amendment petitions should require signatures equal to 10% of the votes cast in the last general municipal election, meaning the city council had to certify the petition so it could advance to a special election.
The Butler County Board of Elections was ordered to certify the measure. It's not clear when the special election will be held.
