ODOT officials say state law is clear — because there are buildings only on the north side of Ohio 41 on the east side of the village, it is not sufficiently developed to warrant a slower speed. Village officials rebuff that.
Councilman Keith Baldwin said the village passed an ordinance that governed speed limits in the town in 1960, and questions ODOT’s jurisdiction to nullify that law.
“What gives them the right to void an ordinance that was enacted in 1960?” Baldwin said.
ODOT officials have since offered to fund a speed study — a necessity for the 35 mph limit to become legal — but negotiations hit a wall.
Baldwin said they want state officials to produce written documentation of their authority before moving forward.
A News-Sun investigation of police ticketing practices in North Hampton found officers wrote 1,296 citations in 2008. At least 170 citations — for various traffic violations including speed — were issued in the disputed area that year.
Charles Balzer, a former village solicitor, said it all started in 1990 when officials allegedly saw a moneymaking opportunity in traffic tickets.
In 1993, Balzer said this issue was part of the reason why he resigned after 25 years of service.
“I saw trouble coming,” he said.
To Balzer, speed enforcement in North Hampton is all about the money — and he says it was designed that way.
Balzer, a former village solicitor, said the landscape changed during a council meeting in 1990.
The police chief at that time announced a new plan to Village Council, Balzer said.
It was a proposal to earn more money for the town by writing traffic tickets, a goal that could be accomplished with the purchase of a new cruiser, said Balzer.
“He passed out a memo about how much money could be made,” Balzer said.
Balzer said he doesn’t know what that memo said because he wasn’t handed a copy and all the memos were gathered after the meeting.
“It doesn’t appear in the minutes,” he said.
It was an issue that Balzer said figured into his decision-making when he retired in 1993 after 25 years as solicitor.
What’s in dispute
The speed limit for 1,000 feet on the east side of Ohio 41 in the village has been the focus of attention for state and local officials for several years.
Officials with the Ohio Department of Transportation assert that the 35 mph speed limit there is illegal.
It should be 50 mph, ODOT officials said, citing the lack of development on the south side of Ohio 41 in that stretch as the mitigating circumstance.
“The east end of the village does not meet the statutory requirements in Section 4511.21 of the Ohio Revised Code for a 35 mph speed limit,” officials wrote in one letter to the village sent in October 2008.
Village officials cried foul.
Councilman Keith Baldwin isn’t convinced that the state agency has jurisdiction over speed in the village.
The village enacted an ordinance in 1960 establishing the speed limit, and Baldwin maintains that the state hasn’t the right to overturn that law.
Police Chief Jarrod Campbell agrees.
“We’re under home rule, that’s our right,” he said. “We have a right to govern our own laws and enforce them.”
ODOT officials did not respond to requests for comment.
A News-Sun review of traffic tickets issued in 2008 found that officers wrote 1,296 citations that year. At least 170 citations — some for speed and some for other traffic violations — were issued in the disputed area that year.
Campbell said police have issued speed citations in the disputed stretch of road for less than 50 mph in the past.
Campbell said he suspended that enforcement in September 2009 while the dispute with ODOT is still being negotiated.
That doesn’t mean officers have stopped paying attention to that part of the village, said Campbell.
“If somebody’s going above 50 mph, that’s going to be a different story,” he said.
Recent events
Some of the efforts to resolve the dispute over the last two years include:
October 2008 and July 2009: ODOT advises in two separate letters to the village that, because of lack of development, the legal speed limit on the east side of Ohio 41 is 50 mph. State officials informed the village that if they thought that 50 mph was too high, they could conduct a speed study.
ODOT representatives said the state would pay for the 50 mph signs.
August 2009: Three ODOT representatives met with village council members Baldwin, Brian Welbaum and Jim Steggemann, Mayor Emory Harrod and Campbell to hash out a solution. Both sides held firm on their differing positions, going back and forth on the issue, according to minutes taken of the meeting.
Craig Eley, ODOT district traffic engineer, reiterated that “the statutory speed limit in this area is 50 mph,” according to the minutes.
Baldwin, Welbaum and Steggemann raised concerns about safety if the speed limit were increased to 50 mph.
“Two serious injury accidents had occurred within the village at speeds much lower than the predicted speeds of vehicles if a 50 mph speed limit were to be posted,” according to a paraphrase recorded in the minutes.
Eley said “law enforcement presence would aid in keeping speeds low,” according to the minutes.
Steggemann and Welbaum said a 50 mph limit would endanger church patrons who cross the street in the disputed area and Baldwin said the village couldn’t afford a speed study.
“Mayor Harrod, Councilmen Steggemann, Welbaum and Baldwin and Chief Campbell could live with a speed limit of 40 mph, tolerate a 45 mph speed limit, but would under no circumstance agree to a posting of 50 mph if the 35 mph was not possible to keep,” according to the meeting minutes.
September 2009: ODOT sends a letter to village officials offering to pay for the speed study. Signs reading "35 mph" would be replaced with "Drive safely" notices in the disputed section of road for the duration of the study.
November 2009: Baldwin sends a letter to the Ohio Attorney General's Office requesting "a formal opinion" on ODOT authority to change the speed limit in the village.
Where it stands
Written proof of ODOT authority is a sticking point for village officials and a necessity for the process to move forward, said Baldwin.
“If they come back and say ‘It’s right here in the law,’ I’ll say, ‘Go ahead and do the speed study,’” said Baldwin.
Baldwin said the village doesn’t have an agenda and is looking after its own interests.
“It’s not a hidden dagger,” said Baldwin. “There’s no smoking gun.”
About the Author