Current News & Events at the Ohio Lakefront Group

Current News and Events

Sunday, May 31, 2009 - Ohio Lakefront Group 2009 Annual Meeting

The Ohio Lakefront Group Annual Meeting was held Thursday May 28th at 7:00 PM at the Holiday Inn West on Crocker Road in Westlake . OLG Chairman Greg Baeppler officiated the official business meeting.

After opening the meeting, Chairman Baeppler called for a moment of silence is memory of OLG Founder Tom Jordan who passed away April 28th.

The first order of business was the election of officers for the 2009-2010 term. The list of nominees for the 2009-2010 fiscal year was presented with an invitation for nominees from the floor. Hearing no other nominees the Secretary cast a vote for election by acclamation. Ten of the past year's officers were re-elected with the addition of Tom Crowley from Vermillion. Click here for the list of officers and their short bios.

Treasurer Ken Tatter presented the annual Treasurer's Report. In summary, expenses were $94,000 with income of $102,000 from dues and donations. The balance on December 31, 2008 was $102,000. Ken reflected the Board's appreciation for the financial support of our members. With an eminent appeal to the Supreme Court coming this year, we need to continue to raise money to fund that appeal. The official business meeting was then closed.

President Tony Yankel presented a short PowerPoint showing OLG's position since the Governor's policy statement of July 13, 2007 mandating that the ODNR honor the deeds of the lakeshore owners and to desist from charging lease payments for land that is within the deed of the property (notwithstanding the high water mark). Tony stated that the time to obtain a permit is still a year or more and that some have continued to receive invoices for their leases. Some persons who have not paid have received threatening notices from the Ohio Attorney General's Office.

During later discussion, ODNR Chief John Watkins stated that they are continuing to work the new rules for approval and that they have not turned over delinquent leases to the AG's office since early last year. He also said ODNR has requested the AG office to stop actions on lease delinquencies that had previously been turned over to them.

Our lead attorney Jim Lang reported on the status of the Lawsuit (still awaiting decision by the Appellate Court). He commented on the Oral Arguments held November 18th 2008, playing clips from the actual hearing. The Judges had a number of interesting questions for the State and the National Wildlife Federation/Ohio Environmental Council lawyers. Jim Lang summarized that while other states surrounding the Great Lakes have different boundaries for the Public Trust and different laws, Ohio has it's own unique laws governing private property ownership. He said that much of the State's argument cited Federal case law, while ignoring Ohio case law, which supports ownership to the water's edge or low water mark.

Greg Baeppler then gave a short presentation about neighborhood meetings that are conducted to inform all lakeshore property owners of the issue of land taking by the State and to bring in new dues paying and supportive members. These meeting are held in the homes of members for 10-20 people who are invited from the neighborhood by the host. An OLG Board member conducts the meetings providing handouts to the attendees. Meetings can also be held in other locations such as libraries, churches, clubhouses, and civic centers. Click here for more information about setting up a neighborhood meeting

After Q & A the meeting was concluded.

Friday, December 12 ,2008 - Oral Arguments with Audio Clips

As reported in our November 22 e-news, oral arguments took place as scheduled on Tuesday November 18, 2008 at 10:00AM to a packed Lake County courtroom. Below is a very brief summary of the hearing along with specific audio clips that you may find interesting to hear.

Presiding Appellate Judge Diane Grendell along with Judge Colleen O'Toole and Judge Timothy Cannon heard oral arguments from all the appellants and cross appellants.

Ohio Assistant Attorney General Cynthia Frazzini argued for the State of Ohio . Judge O'Toole asked whom Ms. Frazzini was representing since ODNR (named as defendant in the lawsuit) and the Governor had withdrawn from the lawsuit and obtained separate legal counsel. Ms. Frazzini received several in-depth questions from all the Judges, which clearly indicated that the Judges were very well prepared for the oral arguments. An audio clip of AAG Frazzini's argument can be heard by clicking here.

Neil Kagan, counsel for the intervening defendants NWF/OEC spoke next of the public's rights for boating, fishing swimming and recreation on Lake Erie . The judges also asked Mr. Kagan several questions, including a clarification as to what “recreation” included. Mr. Kagen's audio clip can be heard by clicking here.

OLG's attorney, Jim Lang, then made the arguments on our appeal. He stated that Judge Lucci's decision was correct in that the furthest landmark point of the Public Trust was to the water's edge. But, that the decision needed to be modified to be the water's edge when the water is free from natural disturbances, such as storms. He noted that modification was consistent with Ohio case law and even a previous Attorney General's opinion. Mr. Lang's audio clips can be heard by clicking here, part 1, part 2. Homer Taft, representing himself, spoke next. Mr. Taft argued that Judge Lucci's decision erred in allowing cross defendents NWF/OEC to intervene, in reforming the deeds to the waters edge, and in not addressing the littoral rights of upland property owners. He argued further that all reference to the public trust include only water and land under water, but never specified dry land. Mr. Taft's audio clip can be heard by clicking here.

Scott Duncan, representing himself and his wife, spoke next and addressed primarily Lake Erie 's western basin, originally called the “firelands.” He traced the deeds for that area (which in fact are true for all of the land abutting Lake Erie) back to 1792 when the land was sold by the Connecticut Land Company. He also noted the extremes between low water and high water in the western basin due to the very slight slope of the land as compared with the eastern areas of the lake with cliffs. He agreed with Judge Lucci's decision regarding the water's edge, but urged that Judge Lucci's reforming of the deeds to the shoreline be reversed. Mr. Duncan's audio clip can be heard by clicking here.

Ms. Frazzini, Mr. Kagan and Mr. Lang then each had a few minutes for rebuttals.

The rebuttal audio clips can be heard by clicking here.

We expect that the Appellate Court will release its decision sometime in the Spring.

Saturday, November 15th, 2008 - State Files to Have Judge Diane Grendell Disqualified - Oral Arguments Still Scheduled
On April 8th, the State of Ohio filed an affidavit with the Ohio Supreme Court to have Judge Diane Grendell disqualified from the panel of judges who will hear our lawsuit appeal.
On Friday, one of our attorneys at Calfee, Halter, and Griswold reported that he received a phone call from a reliable source at the Ohio Supreme Court stating that Chief Justice Moyer just issued an opinion denying the affidavit of disqualification. He said that we should have the written opinion on Monday morning. If you are interested in reading the extensive Affidavit of Disqualification filed by the State, you may do so by clicking this link.
Oral arguments are still scheduled for Tuesday November 18, 2008 at 10:00AM in the Lake County Courthouse in Painesville

at 47 North Park Place.
The Court will hear the appeal by the State of Ohio, and consecutively, the appeal by NWF/OEC. Each side will have just 15 minutes to speak in both cases. Therefore, the entire proceeding for both cases should be concluded within one hour.
We expect that it will be sometime in the Spring that the Appellate Court will release their decision.

Saturday, October 4, 2008 - Constitutional Amendment Issue 3 on November Ballot

A number of members have had questions regarding OLG's position on this issue. OLG strongly favors passage of this very important issue to amend the State Constitution to protect private property rights in ground water, lakes, and other watercourses.

It affects you as Lake Erie shoreline property owners.

This proposed Amendment would:

1. Make explicit that a private property owner has a right to make reasonable use of the ground water that lies beneath the owner's land, although this right is subordinate to the public welfare.

2. Make explicit that a private property owner who owns land on the border of a lake or other watercourse has a right to make reasonable use of the water in such lake or watercourse located on or flowing through the owner's land, although this right is subordinate to the public welfare.

3. Not affect the public's use of Lake Erie and other navigable waters of the state.

4. Prevent the rights confirmed under this proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution from being impaired or limited by the operation of other sections of the Ohio Constitution.

If approved, this amendment takes effect December 1, 2008. A majority YES vote is required for the amendment to be adopted.

VOTE YES ON THIS ISSUE!

Click this link to read the Issue as posted on the November ballot.

Saturday, October 4, 2008 - OLG Survey to Ohio Legislative Candidates

We reported in an earlier e-News that OLG sent a survey to all 210 candidates who are running for election or re-election in November. We asked 4 questions:

• What will you do to protect private property?

• What is your position on the Constitutional Amendment issue?

• What is your position on our SB 189?

• Will you co-sponsor legislation to insure property rights?

The responses have been coming in very slow having received on 12 to date. As we receive responses we will post them on our website beginning this coming week.

Please urge the candidates running in your district to respond.

September 30. 2008 - OLG Final Comments on New ODNR Rules

OLG filed its final comments to the proposed new rules. Specific points made in our response are:

Friday, August 21, 2008 OLG files Final reply Brief to Appellate Court

The question before the trial court and now the appellate court is where the boundary of Ohio's Public trust lies; The OHWM where the water almost never reaches; where the water stands now regardless of disturbing causes; a moving boundary where the water is when affected by disturbing causes; a fixed line based on navigability where the water always flows (low water mark).

OLG has continuously taken the stand that the boundary between public and private “is the line at which the water stands when free from disturbing causes”. This is consistent with Ohio Revised Code. The lawsuit is not about beach walking.

However, OLG also concludes that the trial court erred in reforming all property boundaries to a single boundary as this excludes all previously established property rights.. While ODNR claims to have never given private rights to submerged lands, it has long been established that such transfers took place especially in Sandusky where much of the land is fill. Needless to say, many other properties have property lines established well into the (presently) submerged lands of Lake Erie as affirmed on a case-by-case basis by both the U.S. and Ohio Supreme Courts.

The State can only show that it is administratively convenient to use the OHWM in administering their lease program. From the late 1700s through 1989 – the year ODNR assumed public trust authority over Lake Erie – private littoral landowners in Ohio owned and controlled their shores without challenges from the State. In 1989, ODNR begun its lease program with benefit going only to the State in the form of fees paid for leases (with a percentage going back to the municipality) . Leases also prevented the public from use of the leased land. Paying a lease entitles the leaseholder to exclusive use of the land, except as it may affect navigation.

No matter what face the State attempts to put on their attempts to steal our land, it can only be best characterized as one of the biggest land grabs in the history of the State.

To read the entire brief, click here.

Friday, August 15, 2008 - ODNR Announces Public Meetings for Comment on Proposed New Rules for Leases and Permits

The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Office of Coastal Management announced in a press release that they are sponsoring meetings to solicit input on proposed Ohio Administrative Code rules for managing construction and improvements along the shore. The rules reflect the new policy for managing the state's coastal lands that was announced by Governor Ted Strickland on July 13, 2007. These updates reflect (1) the Governor's Policy, (2) the Lawsuit Decision in OLG's favor, and (3) incorporate public comments received since the initial set of draft rules were announced in September 2007.

While significant improvement has been made in the new rules, there are still some issues and questions that you may have.

Those who want to compare the proposed rules as they are currently worded with what was initially proposed by ODNR may do so at www.ohiodnr.com/coastal/ and select "Land Management". A summary of rules changes is also included on this page. Click on Download the latest Draft OAC Rules 1501-6-01 to 1501-6-40. Please note, the black text is existing rule, the blue text represents changes and the green text is intended to provide clarity on the reason for requesting the information.

Public informational meetings on the proposed rules are scheduled for 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the following dates and locations:

You are encouraged to attend the meeting nearest you to hear about changes and the rules and to ask questions or provide input. We suggest that any suggestions. comments, and concerns be submitted in writing to OCM during or after the meeting.

Additional information on the proposed Ohio Administrative Code rules and the upcoming public meetings is available by calling Liz Everhard, Office of Coastal Management at

(419) 626-7980.

Friday, July 25, 2008 - State Consolidated Reply & Answer Brief

Some observations of the 53-page brief filed by the State include:

• The State is again trying to eliminate the private property issue by stating that Lake Erie is not real property, but goes further to state that the shore in included in Lake Erie, despite the ORC definition. They try to substitute the shoreline for the navigable waters and then conclude that the shoreline is the OHWM. They also claim that the “Equal Footing Doctrine” gave the State ownership to the OHWM; not true according to our previous brief.

• The State Attorney General defends his position to continue this lawsuit giving rationale for nearly a page.

• This brief defends ODNR methodology to set the lakeward boundary of the territory, while previous briefs said that only the State can set boundaries and that ODNR had no such authority. They also fail to mention that the Ohio Public Trust Doctrine was actually changed from the “shoreline” to the OHWM by ODNR Office of Coastal Management.

• The state mistakenly and repeatedly refers to the OHWM of Lake Erie back in the 1700's and at Statehood and beyond. The OHWM for Lake Erie as defined by the Army Corps of Engineers was not set until 1952.

• The State references law regarding navigable waters of Lake Erie and then uses a circular rationalize that navigable water extends over the shore to the OHWM.

• The state quotes from ORC, “the waters of Lake Erie …. together with the soil beneath and their contents…” in their definition of Public Trust, but glibly add “to the OHWM” at every reference.

• The State opines that the Lake is not defined by surveys, only private property. One must wonder how the State defines IGLD 573.4 without surveys. It must be noted that our lawsuit was to cause the State to provide legal evidence of the furthest landward boundary of the Public Trust. Thus far, the State can only attempt to infer OHWM, then use law references that state, “shoreline” and “beneath navigable waters” as their evidence through circular rational.

• The State loves to put in bold type such statements as “ The furthest landward boundary of the territory is the ordinary high water mark as a matter of law, and that line be located using 573.4 IGLD (1985)” It seems apparent that the bold letters are intended to make the statement appear to be true, rather than simply the State's opinion.

• The over-riding argument being made by the State is that the definition of the shoreline is neither the shoreline nor the low water mark, but in fact pertains only to the OHWM to which the State has had ownership of since 1803 (when there was no OHWM).

One argument never brought out in any of the briefs, in my opinion, is that the original physical boundary of Lake Erie was significantly different at Statehood than today. Everyone who has lived on the lake for a long period knows that erosion due to natural and artificial causes has moved the lake water southward over land that had previously been dry beach for centuries. This is property that was originally private, but lost to the Lake and never recovered. Private property owners have lost property due to these erosion events, and some continue to lose beach property. The State wants to further take privately owned land due to these natural and artificial processes over the past 100 years.

The above is the opinion of the author of this article and represents no legal position.

Click here to read the entire brief.

Monday, July 14,2007 - OLG Files Reply Brief to Intervening Defendants

Today OLG filed its brief with the Appellate Court to Intervening Defendants, the National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council.

In our leading argument we refer to defendants misinterpretation of the Ohio Supreme Court Case, Sloan v. Biemiller. In the words of the Sloan case there exists a “proprietor of the shores” who is “owner of the premises”, who can convey “all the estate and interest in the land” and has express authority to “grant” or “reserve” the right to “land on or occupy the shore”. In establishing private ownership of the shores, Sloan established private ownership to the low water mark.

In referencing State v. Cleveland & Pittsburgh, the Court found that “the title and rights of riparian and littoral owners in the sub-aqueous soil of the navigable waters within the limits of the State are governed by the laws of the State…” This holding is consistent with 1506.10 and .11 with reference to “the soil beneath the waters of Lake Erie” and to “the lands presently underlying the waters of Lake Erie”. (One should notice how our briefs quote State and case law, whereby the defendants tend to interpret and paraphrase.)

Again by misinterpretation defendants argue that the Equal Footing Doctrine bound the States to a definition of the boundary of the public trust. Rather, it freed the states to define their own boundary. In a Massachusetts case it was settled by the Court that “the title of the owner of land bounded by tide water extends from the high water mark over the shore or flat to the low water mark. This was a great deviation from the English Common Law so frequently referenced by defendants. There are many cases where English Common Law has been over-ridden by State law.

Further, OLG refers to Intervening Appellants “imaginary federal common law”. Having misconstrued Ohio Common Law, Intervening Appellants conclude that the (federal) Fleming Act adopted the OHWM as the boundary for all states. Clearly, the only settled rule in Ohio is that the boundary is “the line at which the water usually stands free from disturbing causes”. Recall that the State is the authority on setting the boundary of the public trust.

The conclusion of the brief states that Intervening Appellants cite no Ohio authority establishing a boundary at the OHWM. The statutes, understandings and express holding in Ohio have consistently placed the boundary at the low water mark. OLG asks that the Court set the boundary as a matter of law, at the low water mark.

To read the entire brief click here.

Friday, July 4, 2008 - National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council File Appeal Reply Brief

On the week preceding Independence Day the “Conservationists” filed their appeal brief. The “Conservationists”, as they now call themselves, are the National Wildlife Federation and the Ohio Environmental Council.

It is interesting to note that on this Independence Day weekend the initial argument posed is based on British common law. I thought Independence Day was all about a complete and total separation from Britain. British common law seems to appear in both the State and the Conservationist's arguments.

Conservationists further argue that only the State, not ODNR, has the right to establish boundaries for Lake Erie. However, most of their further discussion about the OHWM hinges on rules established by ODNR. It is ODNR, not the State that created the current land grab from its private citizens.

Appellants quote from case law providing that the State “controls” the navigable waters up to the OHWM. Control has always been within OLG's concept of the State's responsibility, but not “ownership”. This seems to be an area that is much confused in their arguments. The OHWM is a regulatory line rather than a property line.

The Conservationists continue to use "well established" Ohio common law in their arguments. Ohio Revised Code (ORC) always takes precedent over common law. The ORC definition found at 1506.10 clearly defines the boundary of the territory of Lake Erie to include only the submerged lands of Lake Erie.

All of the cases cited by the Conservationists use the words “covered by water”, or “owns the bed”, or “fishing from navigable waters”. Nowhere do they cite case law allowing fishing from private beaches or the public owning the shore not covered by water.

They also seem to misunderstand the concept of littoral property rights. They state that littoral property owners have the right to wharf out to navigable waters (among other rights), but the littoral property owner does not own the property being used to wharf out. This may be true. However, the littoral property owner is wharfing out from his private property across the submerged land, in the public trust. The littoral property owner has always applied for necessary permits to erect structures in the water. The issue is about deeded private property, not littoral rights.

While the conservationists arguments seem to be better prepared than the State's, they are equally circuitous and contradictory. The full brief can be viewed by clicking here.

The above is the opinion of this author and does not represent any legal position regarding the lawsuit.

Friday, May 30, 2008 - OLG Files Appeal Brief Response to State and Cross Appeal

This past week, OLG filed its brief with the 11thth District State Court of Appeal. The entire 45 page brief is posted on the website and can be viewed by clicking here.
Key points in the reply brief are:

Tony Yankel gave an update leading off saying: “We have won our lawsuit but our victory has been appealed”!

He again reviewed the Governor's statement and leasing policy which allowed that while the Governor acknowledges that we own our land, we may still VOLUNTARLY make lease payments. So if anyone wants to voluntarily make lease payments, you are free to do so when you are sent invoices for submerged lands leases for land that you own. He then went over the ABCD property dispute that he presented last year and that started over 1 ½ years ago. It has still not been settled by ODNR.

Tony brought to our attention a new ploy on the part of many municipalities and townships called Riparian Setbacks. These are zoning ordinances described as “no cut” zones requiring that the land on any watercourse be preserved in its natural state a minimum of 75 feet from the watercourse. In some flood areas, the “no cut” zone may extend 150 feet or more. A watercourse is defined as “any natural, perennial, or intermittent lake, pond, channel, stream, river, creek, or brook…” This appears as another scary government attempt to take over private property.

Jim Lang, lead attorney for OLG in our lawsuit gave us an update. The State of Ohio and the National Wildlife Federation with the Ohio Environmental Council (NWFOEC) have filed their Appeal Briefs. We have returned our response to the NWF/OEC. We expect to return our response to the State this coming week. Jim expects that the 11 th District Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in the fall of the year with a ruling in the late first quarter of 2009. After that any appeal will move to the Ohio Supreme Court, if not by the State, most likely by the NWF/OEC.

Greg Baeppler made a presentation on Neighborhood Meetings. Greg has taken on this responsibility to help you get neighbors informed and involved and to have them join OLG to further increase our political presence in the State.

These meeting can be held in your home, yard, church, community center, yacht club, or marina. All you need to do is invite the guests and Greg and OLG will provide the rest. For more information visit our website on the What you can Do page. You can contact Greg at 216-577-6811 or gbaeppler@att.net .

Tony did a wrap up prior to introducing Senator Tim Grendell . Tony made four points on how we can all make OLG successful in our private property rights fight. They are:

• Get involved

• Contribute – are funds are diminishing

• Inform others and get them to join

• Hold Neighborhood meetings

Senator Tim Grendell spoke primarily about the Great Lakes Basin Compact and how it, as currently written, can negate our lawsuit. See the May 24th e-News to read about his presentation. As always, Tim continues his fight for private property rights, whether on the lake or inland waters. He is a staunch Constitution supporter and plans to see our fight to the end. Tim always gives an inspiring talk and this was no exception. He plans to retain his Senate seat in the upcoming election so that he can continue this important fight.

The meeting and presentations ended at 9:00 PM The Power Point Presentation may be accessed by clicking here.

Monday, May 12, 2008 – Public Trust Doctrine
The “Public Trust Doctrine” as it is currently understood and practiced was created by Joseph Sax in an article published in the Michigan Law Review in 1970.
A short introduction to the article, debunking Sax' is posted by the Berkeley Electronic Press. That post includes other articles discussing the pros and cons of the public trust as defined by Sax. To read this short introduction, as well as the lengthy article, click here.

Friday, April 18, 2008 - State of Ohio Files Appeal Brief with Appellate Court

On April 17, 2008 the State of Ohio filed its 58 page brief with the Appellate Court. Much of the brief restates what had been previously presented in the original case and citing numerous other court cases that the State believes will support their appeal. The State continues to use the IGLD (International Great Lakes Datum) of 573.4 feet as the ordinary high water mark since statehood and cites Ohio revised code, which never mentions the IGLD.

One key argument by the State is that the Court relied on “Historical records” dealing with this case as one of a real property rather than one of public trust rights. In other words, it appears that the State is claiming that private property rights are not at issue here. Of course, the State cited the Michigan case where the Supreme Court ruled that the public had the right to walk on the beaches of private property owners. (The Michigan law in fact specifically used ordinary high water mark within its context, whereby the Ohio Revised Code does not.)

Several important reasons for the ruling seem to have been left out. They are the Constitution of the United States , the Ohio Constitution, Ohio Revised Code, and the legal deeds of private property owners.

The State continues its same distorted interpretation of Ohio law, hoping that the appeals court will not see through their charade. As Judge Lucci has shown, the courts are not easily swayed by repetition and skewed interpretations of the law.

The OLG continues to stand by our belief that the U.S. Constitution, the Ohio Constitution, the Ohio Revised Code, and our property deeds are on our side and will prevail over the State. Our deeds have stood on Lake Erie since before statehood. Their legality should not b altered at the whim of a state agency, extreme environmentalists, or sports hunting groups. To read the full (58 page) brief, click here.

Monday, April 7, 2008 - National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council File Appeal Briefs

The National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council (NWF/OEC filed their Appeal Brief with the Appellate Court on April 7th. There appears to be no relevant new information that has not come before the Court before the Appeal. The assertions by NWF/OEC in their brief are as follows:
    “The trial court erred in holding that the public trust in Lake Erie is demarcated by the line the water of the lake touches at any given time.”
    "The trial court erred in holding that the Ohio Department of Natural Resources may not use the IGLD elevation to establish the high water mark of Lake Erie.”
    "The trial court erred in holding that the littoral property owners may exclude the people from using the lands below the high water mark of Lake Erie.
Numerous Federal and State trial cases are cited in their brief, including cases involving rivers and tidal waters. Lake Erie is not tidal water. They also exhibited an economic analysis, which stated:
   “The beauty and excitement of the lake draws millions of visitors to it each year. They come to experience the rich maritime history, walk its windswept beaches, canoe scenic tributaries, and climb beautiful lighthouses. In addition to direct expenditures the effect of visitors taking part in these activities is the creation of more than 130,000 jobs and the generation of more than $400,000 in state and local taxes.”
It appears that the economy is doing well without the trespass on private property. The economic analysis does not consider private property in its analysis.
   A number of affidavits were attached from individuals who claim they have walked the “private” beaches for years and intend to do so in the future. So it would appear that private property owners have not damaged these people. However, the NWF/OEC states they want accessibility to beaches on private property to “picnic, bird watch, exercise…. (and to) canoe or swim from the shore.
   While one cannot speculate on what the court may think of the arguments set forth by NWF/OEC, there still appears to be no compelling argument to invalidate private property deeds that have stood on Lake Erie since well before Ohio's statehood.
To read the full brief, click here.

Friday, February 1, 2008 - OLG Files Motions on State's Motion for Stay

OLG Plaintiffs filed motions in response to the “State of Ohio's Motion for Stay of Execution of Judgment pending Appeal”

Two motions were filed. The first took issue with false assertions made by the State. The state cited a similar case involving ODNR's unconstitutional taking of property. The “Stay for Fees” was ultimately heard in the State Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of granting the plaintiff fees and against the State. The State's claim clearly contradicted the case law cited by the State. Also, one of the Assistant Attorneys General signing the State's Motion for Stay, was council to ODNR in the cited case and surely knew that the outcome was otherwise than that presented by the State.

It appears that the State is not only giving misinformation, as has the ODNR since the inception of our lawsuit, but the State is trying to fool the Courts with their false claims. Hopefully, the Court will not be fooled and will rule on the truth of the law.

The second motion filed by OLG Plaintiffs simply applies logic to the State's Motion for Stay. By requesting a Stay, the State is merely extending the period for damages resulting in the State's “temporary” taking of private property. OLG expects that, at a minimum, appropriate damages will include refunding of submerged lands lease payments wrongfully collected as well as other fees that property owners incurred such as engineering fees or mitigation fees. Plaintiffs could also pursue compensation, calculated using market-based lease rates over a multi-year period for the private property wrongfully taken as well as damages to the residual property to the extent that the State's conduct devalued the market value of Plaintiff's littoral property. Simply stated, the State's request for Stay could prove to be economically injurious to the State in the long run, costing the taxpayers more money.

The motions can be viewed by clicking the following links: Motion 1 Motion 2

Friday, January 25, 2008 - Great Lakes Compact - Giving Away Ohio's Most Significant Natural Resource

While the State is telling Ohioans how lakeshore property owners are stealing the beaches from all of the people of Ohio (ongoing disinformation), the State is also asking that the legislature ratify the Great Lakes Compact, which will potentially remove all jurisdiction by the State over the entire Lake Erie as well as all streams and bodies of water in the Lake Erie Basin, including groundwater.

The compact may prevent any property owners or fishers in Lake Erie from taking water from Lake Erie and the entire Lake Erie watershed. This may require well owners, farmers, and other who use ground water to obtain permits to use their own ground water for their use and livelihood upon which they depend. Further, the rule stating only 5.7 gallons may be removed from the lake by an individual will certainly affect fishermen who may use a 10 gallon container in which to hold their catch of fish.

Entering into this Compact will supercede all current legislation and private and public property rights that have been in place since the formation of the State in 1803.

The rush to ratify this Compact will affect every Ohioan now and in the forever future.

To read a synopsis of the misconceptions and facts about the Compact along with problems and solutions, click this link.

Friday. January 11, 2008 - Notices of Appeal Filed by State AG, NWF, and OEC

On January 10th Attorney General Dann filed a Notice of Appeal with the Court. On the same date the National Wildlife Federation and the Ohio Environmental Council duly filed their Notices of Appeal.

A Notice of Appeal is simply a form that is filled out stating technical case information (plaintiffs, defendants, case number, etc.) and filed with the Appeals Court. The appeals were filed in the 11th District Court of Appeal, which includes Lake County where the original case was heard.

On January 20th, OLG filed a Notice of Cross-Appeal. Homer Taft filed a cross-appeal. Intervening Plaintiffs Taft and Duncan's lawsuit was combined with our lawsuit in the class action.

The cross-appeal gives us an opportunity to focus on items in the decision of interest to lakeshore property owners at the same time fighting the State AG's appeal.

Once the case is assigned to a Judge, the Motions from the State, NWF, and OEC will begin and we expect the legal expenses to begin to pile on, once again.

Friday, January 11, 2008 - OLG Files Motion for Fees

In our brief, filed January 10th, we have requested the court to award fees in the total amount of our legal costs in defending the property rights of littoral property owners against the State.

In our motion we stated that we were faced with the challenge of property ownership by the State, who ignored AG Lee Fisher's opinion in 1993 that the water's edge was the boundary of the State's territory in Lake Erie. The State deliberately defied the law, but was defeated in Court and OLG has statutory rights to an award of fees as the prevailing party.

The brief includes a short synopsis of the court action beginning with our initial filing on May 28, 2004, the removal of the case, by the State, to Federal Court in February 2005 and return to Lake County Court in June of 2006. The case was certified as a Class Action on June 9, 2006. After another 14 months of motions by both sides, the Court issued a Summary Judgment in our favor or December 11, 2007.

OLG seeks to recover $303,442.74 in payments for legal costs associated with our lawsuit.

While statute allows for an award of fees, the Judge must determine whether fees will be paid, in whole or in part. Meanwhile, the State has filed for a Motion for Stay of the Judge's order until the appeal has been completed. We expect that the Court will grant this Stay.

In summary, we cannot depend on receiving any funds from the lawsuit to continue our battle against the appeals.

To read the full Motion, click here.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007 - Lake County Common Pleas Court, Judge Lucci Rules in Favor of OLG

The following is a press release issued by OLG President Tony Yankel today:

This is a great day for the Ohio Lakefront Group and for anyone in Ohio that owns private property.

Today, Judge Lucci of Lake County Common Pleas Court ruled in a class action suit that the property owners along the Lake Erie shoreline own the land consistent with their deeds, and to the water's edge

The lawsuit was filed in May 2004 in response to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources' unsubstantiated claims of state ownership of private property under the Taft Administration, and then forcing private property owners to lease their own property back from the State.

Prior to Ohio 's statehood, our deeds said this property belongs to us. Since statehood, Ohio law and our deeds said this property belongs to us. In 1993, then Ohio Attorney General Lee Fisher agreed and said that the land to the water's edge belongs to the property owner and was not public property. A few months ago Governor Strickland said he would honor our deeds unless a court decided otherwise. And now we have a Court ruling that upholds our position.

This has been a long and expensive fight for our members. It has been disturbing to actually witness the State of Ohio simply invalidating deeds because a few bureaucrats decided to ignore the law and rewrite history. Hopefully the Court's decision puts an end to this ridiculous government taking of private property.

Significant points of Judge Lucci's decision include:

The Ohio Lakefront Group is a non-profit organization of over 6,000 members that live along the shore of Lake Erie . To read the full order by Judge Lucci, click here.

Saturday, December 1, 2007 - Great Lakes Compact in the News

   Several news articles have been written about the Great Lakes Compact lately, much in the favor of environmentalists who now say that climate change appears likely to reduce already low Great Lakes water levels even further, making it more urgent to approve a regional compact protecting the waters of the Great Lakes from diversion and overuse.
    The primary objective of the Compact between the 8 Great Lakes States and 2 Canadian Provinces is to stop the taking of fresh water from the Great Lakes watershed, which would reduce the total amount of fresh water remaining in the Lakes. This is a very worthy goal, however as is often the case, the devil is in the details. (Note that a federal statute already does provide such protection.)
    In last year's Ohio Senate hearings, OLG President Tony Yankel testified before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in opposition to the Compact. He expressed the concern that Ohio Lakefront Group members have for the Compact as written, especially the provision that would expand the Public Trust Doctrine to all ground and surface water in the Great Lakes watershed.
    Senator Tim Grendell argued that a provision declaring the waters of the five Great Lakes to be “part of the public trust” would convert existing private property rights to the public domain. Under the Compact, the State gives up its sovereign rights of governance over the entire area specified in the Compact and the Compact's governing group would be immune from all legal actions by individuals or states.
    A special task force recommended by Senator Grendell is charged with review of the Compact to make corrective changes to “fix” the Compact before it comes to a vote by the General Assembly. While some states have already passed the Compact, other states, such as Wisconsin share the concerns voiced by Senator Grendell.

Environmentalists are strongly proposing immediate passage of the Compact as written. We as OLG members, along with anyone who lives in the Lake Erie watershed, need to be concerned about passage. Without the fixes that allow the State of Ohio to retain State sovereignty and private property owners to be assured that property rights are not diminished, the Compact should not be approved.

Friday, November 23, 2007 - Huron River Greenway Property Owners Victorious

Information as reported by Tom Jackson in the Sandusky Register on November 22, 2007:

In a lawsuit filed by property owners, (CPPR “Citizens for the Protection of Property Rights”) , along the Huron River Greenway which was developed by Erie Metro Parks, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the taking of property by the park system was illegal. The original lawsuit was filed in 1997.

The court ordered the park system to begin figuring out how to compensate property owners who have claimed ownership of the land that became the Huron River Greenway. The ruling by the court was 6-0. (Justice Terrence O'Donnell did not participate in the ruling.) This is a huge win for property owners throughout the state engaged in similar battles with governmental authorities.

Nels Ackerson of Washington, DC, attorney for the plaintiffs said: The ruling is important because it upholds the principal of the U.S. Constitution that government with the “awesome power” to take private land for public purposes must provide just compensation (for the land owners). “It is a very substantial case. It's a landmark case. It's a result of a great deal of persistence and efforts by he landowners,” Ackerson said. “It's very gratifying to know that in this country, the Constitution does prevail.”

Damages will be determined in a trial that will now go forward. It is likely that other landowners who did not participate in the suit will step forward to receive compensation.

OLG Members: While this is good news, note that CPPR's original lawsuit filed in 1997, after 5 years of fighting the Erie county park system, took an additional 10 years to reach the Supreme Court for a decision. Our lawsuit was filed in 2004; our fight began in 1999, so that means we only have about 6 ½ more years to go. NO JOKE! Whatever the decision by Lake County Common Pleas Court Judge Lucci, the appeal process will be even more arduous than the original suit. While it may seem that Judge Lucci's decision may hand us a win, we still have a VERY long way to go.

Congratulations to all our friends in CPPR, good guys can finish first if you persevere and fight till the end.

Friday, November 10, 2007 - A History of the Western Reserve

An interesting book entitled “The Early History of Lorain County” published in 1879 in Philadelphia by the Williams Brothers that prior OLG board member Tom Jordan found in digital form that can be accessed from the OLG website. The history extends from 1609 to 1879, the year the book was published.

It is interesting in understanding how the territory known as the Western Reserve evolved, embracing the counties of Ashtabula, Trumbull, Portage, Geauga, Lake, Cuyahoga, Medina, Lorain, Huron, Erie, all of Summit except the township of Franklin, and Green; the two northern tiers of townships of Mahoning; the townships of Sullivan, Troy, and Ruggles, of Ashland; and the Islands lying north of Sandusky, including Kelly's and Put-in-Bay.

The book traces the legal title of the land in the U.S. even prior to the Declaration of Independence.

There were ninety-three townships, or equalized parcels drawn east of the Cuyahoga, and forty-six on the west. Congress, on the 28th of April, 1800, authorized the President to execute and deliver on the part of the United States , Letters Patent to the Governor of Connecticut, whereby the United States released for the uses named, all right and title to the soil of the Reserve, and confirmed it unto those who had purchased it from that State.

The entire publication can be viewed by clicking here.

Friday, November 10, 2007 - Proposed Leasing and Permitting Rules Comments Presented at Quarterly CRAC Meeting

The Office of Coastal Management (OCM) compiled the work product of the 4 sessions of review by the CRAC Sub-Committee, including attachments of meeting minutes and other correspondence received by OCM. A binder containing all information was provided to CRAC members at the recent November 8th meeting held in Ashtabula. This represents many man-hours of review and consolidation of input, which resulted in 166 comments, imbedded line by line into the proposed rules. (50 comments related to definitions, 24 related to the application process, 7 related to leases, and the remaining 85 related to the permitting process.)

Comments about the definitions include:

Friday, November 10. 2007 - Audubon Article – “Get Off Your Land”

This is the title of a regular column called Incite by Ted Williams in the November-December issue of Audubon. Mr. Williams has written a variety of columns ranging from the Endangered Species Act to Whitetail Deer and the Golden Eagle to West Nile Virus. This month he has cast his sights on “property-rights radicals” who are chasing the public from its own beaches. He goes on to name this group, the Ohio Lakefront Group. The article goes on with interviews from the Ohio Environmental Council, the National Wildlife Federation and others. We are not only accused of “land-grabbing” but of planning to fill our beaches and build environmentally unfriendly structures that will be a detriment to lake Erie.

Of most interest are quotes from State Attorney General Marc Dann who stated that the Governor's position is “inconsistent with Ohio law”. AG Dann went on to state: ‘I believe my role is to represent my institutional clients as well as the people those institutions were created to serve”. “The only person who can represent the State of Ohio is me. ODNR is a client; they changed their position against my advice. I had no alternative but to hire them outside lawyers.” AG Dann's conclusion about the lakefront property owners is: “These folks have been defrauded by someone, but it wasn't the State of Ohio. You can't give what you don't own”.

The entire article can be accessed by clicking here.

Friday, November 2, 2007 - CRAC Sub-Committee Minutes Posted
   The Rules, Laws, Consistency, Enforcement and Implementation Sub-Committee of the Coastal Resources Advisory Council (CRAC) completed its review of the ODNR proposed rules for Submerged Lands Leases and the Permitting of Coastal Structures on October 25, 2007. The minutes of all three review meetings as well as written comments and associated correspondence are posted on the Office of Coastal Management (OCM) website. To access their website, click here. Links to the proposed rules and meeting minutes are on the right side of the page.
    OCM Chief John Watkins and staff are working on incorporating all the oral and written comments into a single document that will then be presented to the full CRAC council on Thursday, November 8. The meeting will be held at the Ashtabula Marine Museum , 1071 Walnut Blvd in Ashtabula , beginning at 10:00 AM. This meeting is open to the public and we urge you to attend.
    Directions are: Drive east on I90 to exit 228 (OH 11/ OH 46). Go North towards Ashtabula for 6.2 miles. Turn left on OH 531/ E 6th Street and continue .9 miles. Turn right on Morton Drive for .1 miles and then left on Walnut Blvd.
    If the full Council approves the proposed rules, ODNR will continue with soliciting public comments on the rules as approved by the Coastal Resources Advisory Council.
    After receiving and considering public comments, the rules will be presented to Ohio 's Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review.
ODNR hopes to have the final rules in place in early 2008. We are working to ensure that the final rules package respects the rights of all shoreline property owners while protecting Ohio 's valuable Lake Erie resources.
    If you have questions or comments about the rules, please contact the ODNR Office of Coastal Management at 419-626-7980.

Friday, November 2, 2007 - Ohio Environmental Council Continues Misinformation

    In an article posted in the Ohio Environmental-Conservation Briefing Book*, Jack Shaner continues to espouse the mistaken belief that “the public's ownership of the Lake Erie shore, up to the ordinary high water mark-is supported by State and Federal law, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, and 200 years of tradition.”
    This is not a true statement of fact. There is no such document giving this description or anything like it. What did happen was under the Equal Footing Act, the Federal Government gave Ohio what the Federal Government owned at the time Ohio became a State. This did not include the lands of the Western Reserve, which border Lake Erie. Prior to Ohio Statehood, the President of the United States gave what amounted to a limited warranty deed for the Western Reserve of Connecticut to the State of Connecticut as well as the investors that purchased the Western Reserve of Connecticut from the State of Connecticut in 1795. The State of Ohio has never owned the lands of the Western Reserve .
    Further, the public has enjoyed the use of all lakefront property owned by the State , unless however they are restricted of use by the State.
    Shaner refers to a “tiny group of private property owners”. This “tiny group” is more than 15,000 property owners with valid deeds to their property along the shores of Lake Erie.
    He uses the 11 million population of the State of Ohio along with all future generations as the unknowing losers in the battle for the rights of private property owners. Those private property rights are defined in the Constitution and in the Ohio Revised Code (ORC 1506). If one reads the entire section 1506 of the ORC they would see that the rights of the public as well as those of private property owners are equally protected under the law.
    Mr. Shaner has also coined a new term “common ground” as public land, which actually means the deeded land of private property owners.
    He writes about State and Federal Supreme Court decisions (no cites). There are no court decisions related to the lands of the Western Reserve .
    The article can be accessed by clicking here. The Jack Shaner article begins on page 36. You may want to e-mail Mr. Shaner to share your thoughts with him.

Saturday, October, 27, 2007 - Contact List for Ohio Government and Lakeshore County Legislators

We often have requests for names and contact information for the Ohio Governor's Office as well as your legislators representing the lakeshore counties. We have compiled a contact list which can be accessed by clicking here.

Saturday, October 27, 2007 - One Lakeshore Property Owner's Response to OLG Lease Invoice

One lakeshore owner has come up with his own idea of dealing with invoices for Submerged Lands Leases involving his own property. He is taking this action as a result of the Governor's policy stating that the State of Ohio “will honor valid deeds of local property owners along the coast of Lake Erie.” The owner believes that he has a valid deed for all or a portion of the land for which he has been making lease payments.

He has written the ODNR informing them that until the State can demonstrate that his deed is invalid, he is depositing his lease payments in a separate (escrow) account in the bank. If the State can, within three years, prove his deed invalid, he will turn over appropriate funds deposited in that account. If after three years the State has not done so, he will withdraw the money and assume the matter closed. His letter copies the Governor, ODNR Director, Attorney General, OLG, and several newspapers.

The letter can be viewed by clicking here.

Saturday, October 27, 3007 - Sub-Committee Completes Review of Proposed New Rules

The Rules, Laws, Consistency, Enforcement and Implementation Sub-Committee of the Coastal Resources Advisory Council (CRAC) completed its review of the ODNR proposed rules for Submerged Lands Leases and the Permitting of Coastal Structures this week. OLG members Tom Jordan, Jim O'Connor, Ken Tatter and L. Scot Duncan, Kent Kemmerer, as well as members of the Ohio Environmental Council participated in these public meetings.

The Sub-Committee, chaired by Dave Spotts, must be congratulated for completing this very detailed review, which included at least 100 comments and suggestions from the committee and the public. The proposed rules along with all comments incorporated into the documents will be presented to the full CRAC at their November 8th meeting in Ashtabula.

Office of Coastal Management (OCM) Chief John Watkins, who conceived the idea of this first time public review of proposed rules, maintained the record of comments using a computer projector so that all could see the actual language of the input from the group. The proposed rules with comments will be posted on the ODNR Office of Coastal Management website.

After the full CRAC review and their additional input, ODNR will incorporate all input as possible to provide a revised set of proposed rules. Sub-Committee Chair, Dave Spots, asked that the revised rules be presented to the sub-committee prior to going out for public comment. John Watkins agreed.

The ODNR, after soliciting, receiving, and considering public comments, will present the rules to Ohio's Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review. Their review will take no more than 60 days. Then the rules are delivered to the Secretary of State and within 10 more days they will become law.

At the conclusion of the rules review, Chief John Watkins addressed the group thanking everyone for their input and addressing concerns of trust with the Office of Coastal Management. He explained that he was not involved with the 1994 rules (that were surreptitiously incorporated into legislation, ed.) that gave the Office of Coastal Management broad powers of Lake Erie Coastal property to the Ordinary High Water Mark. He understands the consternation and frustration of lakeshore property owners. He further stated that he was involved with rules making in 1999 and most recently in the HB 199 appropriations bill. His role was as a writer, acting under the authority of the Director. He expected that these rules would be sent out for public comment (as had been done in his time with the Ohio EPA with new rules). He apologized saying that he at no time had an under-handed intent with rules making. This is why he personally took on this public review with CRAC and the public. He assured us that he is trying to build a cooperative process between the Office of Coastal Management and lakeshore property owners.

We hope that ODNR Director Sean Logan and those who will finally implement these rules will work cooperatively and respect private property deeds, provide fair and uniform enforcement of rules, and continue to build the trust of lakeshore property owners.

If you have questions or comments about the rules or the rule making processes, please contact the ODNR Office of Coastal Management at 419-626-7980. To access their website, click here .

Saturday, October 20. 2007 - Lease Holders Must Still Pay Leases

Last week we reported on the letter from ODNR Director Sean Logan advising leaseholders that certain leases may be eliminated or modified in the future. This was as a result of Governor Strickland's order to respect the deeds of private property owners.

However, lease invoices continue to be sent out from the Office of Coastal. Management. I contacted their office and spoke with Chief, John Watkins. The following are points from our conversation:

The bottom line is that you are expected to pay your lease rental when it is due, and until the rules are changed to allow modifications or elimination of the leases. It is important to note that submerged lands leases that extend beyond your deeded property line are still subject to lease payments. This would include groins, docks, and other structures built out into the lake that extends beyond your deeded property.

Saturday, October 13, 2007 - ODNR Proposed Rules

The ODNR website has the new proposed rules for leases and permits. The preamble to the rules includes the statement by Governor Ted Strickland, which directs the ODNR to respect the valid deeds of shoreline property owners. However, the permitting process as currently proposed seems onerous. The seven-step procedure with 6 sub-requirements involves an extraordinary effort that will surely require the services of a professional engineer. For example, the first requirement includes, in addition to deed records and a map showing the location of the proposed structure with respect to county, township, and municipal boundaries and state, county and local reads:

“Detailed plans and specifications, including supporting calculations, analyses, studies and other information used by the professional engineer or applicant in designing the structure. The engineering methods and design conditions (wave height, wind direction, water level, water depth, etc) used in designing the structure shall also be specified. Design methodologies and procedures that have been established by the United Stated Army Corps of Engineers, the American Society of Civil Engineers and others that are recognized as valid coastal engineering practices will generally be acceptable.”

There are six sub-sections to this requirement, which are too lengthy to report here.

The Director's review may include:

• Potential impact upon air and water quality;

• Likelihood that the development… may affect historic, cultural, or aesthetic resources;

• Floral and faunal communities.;

• Potential impact upon wetlands or other state resource waters;

• Potential impact upon littoral zone including sand transport;

• Plus 16 additional review items

To read the entire proposed rules, click here to access the ODNR website. Read down to Draft Rules and then click September 29, 2007 .

Friday. October 12, 2007 - CRAC Seeking New Members

The Coastal Resources Advisory Council has 9 seats to be filled for the next four-year term beginning February 2008. We are asking our members to consider applying for an appointment to provide shoreline owners with better representation and to voice our concerns.

Applications are available from our website and can be downloaded by clicking here. OR contact the ODNR Office of Coastal Management at 419-626-7980. Applications sent to the Office of Coastal Management must be postmarked by November 1.

Thursday, August 8, 2007 - CRAC Council Meeting

We previously reported some erroneous information about the August 8th meeting on Kelleys Island that 12 OLG members attended.

We erroneously reported that CRAC members were made up of many ODNR employees. This is not true. The members come from diverse areas of business, education, and government. The complete list of CRAC members, along with a brief bio can be found at the Office of Coastal Management web site by clicking here. These bios indicate that some of the CRAC members work for a governmental entity or are involved with some conservation organization—hence the misunderstanding about their ODNR affiliation.

Department of Natural Resources Director Sean Logan and Office of Coastal Management Chief John Watkins attended the meeting. Both Director Logan and Chief Watkins spoke about the Governor's New Regulatory Policy Regarding Coastal Land Management. A portion of the policy states:

“The Governor and ODNR recognize that there are arguable legal claims that some of the deeds have specific defects and that deeds purporting to cover lands below the OHWM may ultimately be found by the Ohio courts to be subordinate to the public's interest in those lands. Still, without such a determination by the Ohio courts, ODNR believes that it must honor those deeds.

The Governor and ODNR also recognize that they have a solemn duty to manage coastal lands in a manner that protects the important resource that Lake Erie represents. In that regard, ODNR has begun the planning necessary to implement the following new regulatory policies:

Property owners who wish to build structures along the shores of Lake Erie that could or would impact coastal lands will no longer be required to obtain leases for the lands within their deeds which are beneath such structures, but will be obligated to obtain appropriate permits from ODNR's Office of Coastal Management before commencing any such construction.”

Both Director Logan and Chief Watkins spoke of their planned efforts to revise the ODNR Administrative Code to comply with the Governor's policy. This was very heartening and seemed to pave the way for the resolution to be introduced by O'Connor.

The last item on the agenda was the resolution, which Jim O'Connor introduced with a preliminary overview of the formation and struggle of OLG against the State.

The resolution as read:

“BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

The Coastal Resources Advisory Council recommends that ODNR and the Office of Coastal Management immediately and appropriately notify all residents that have Lake Erie submerged lands leases with the State. The notification should state that, to the extent covered by private deeds, the State will immediately waive the requirement in the lease for the payment of fees pursuant to the Governor's July 13, 2007, announcement. The Coastal Resources Advisory Council further recommends that that ODNR and the Office of Coastal Management convert all leases of privately deeded property to permits within six (6) months.”

O'Connor's motion for the Council to accept the resolution was NOT seconded by any CRAC member. Therefore by Roberts Rules there could be no further discussion.

Despite the lack of a second, Council Chair, James Kastelic, allowed further discussion, which included comments by Director Logan and Chief Watkins. The Council Chair further asked that the resolution be sent to the Rules, Laws, Consistency, Enforcement and Implementation Committee for review prior to asking for a vote of the entire Council. He also asked Jim O'Connor if he would join that committee for this review, to which Jim agreed. The agenda for the meeting, in fact, had shown that the motion would be forwarded to committee.

During the public comment portion of the meeting, the CRAC members were attentive and responsive to points made by those in attendance.

We believe this shows correctly what occurred in the meeting and that the review committee will look carefully at the Governor's policy and find the resolution consistent with that policy.

Monday, July 30, 2007 - Final Briefs Filed in Lawsuit

All parties filed Reply Briefs this week as the final round of motions and briefs to go before the Court. While the OLG's 36-page and the State's 64-page final Reply Briefs are much too complex to explain in a few words, I believe they can be summarized as follows:

OLG presents law and case evidence at the federal and state level that completely refutes any of the misinterpretations of the State's position of ownership to the Ordinary High Water Mark. OLG further defines the State's boundary at the low water mark.

The State continues to use the same misinterpretation of law and case evidence to argue the State's ownership of the dry land up to the Ordinary High Water Mark, including filled land.

In the OLG Proposed Order, we ask the Court conclude that the furthest landward boundary of the “territory” is the low water mark of Lake Erie. We further ask that Class Members enjoy unique rights, known as “littoral rights”, and that the general public does not enjoy these rights. Further, Class Members are entitled, through the right of accretion, to ownership of new lands adjoining their property formed by the natural deposit of soil above the low water mark. And, Class Members retain ownership of lands lost suddenly and perceptively to Lake Erie and are entitled to reclaim such lost lands by artificial fill.

In the State's inferred proposed order, it asks that the Court find that the State has ownership of the Public Trust property up to the Ordinary High Water Mark, specifically 573.4 feet, and that the public has the rights to the use of that land.

To read the OLG Reply Brief, click here. To read the OLG Proposed Motion (for the Court) click here. To read the State's Reply Brief, click here.

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - OLG Press Conference Condemns "Takings"

The Ohio Lakefront Group and Senator Grendell held a press conference at the Capitol to express dismay at the recent actions of ODNR and to introduce a new Senate Bill.

In response to ODNR's recent proposal to take deeded land from several property owners and give the land to another, Tony Yankel, President of OLG, said. "...ODNR has taken this stealing of private property to new heights. ODNR is not only claiming private property as public, but it is now considering 'leasing' it to a third party." The proposal is to take property away from three landowners so that a fourth landowner, who has no access to the Bay, will obtain 55 feet of frontage.

"There has been a national outcry against government using eminent domain...taking property from one person and giving it to another...This is a least as outrageous...owners are not even offered any compensation...it is simply stolen," said Yankel. "When is Governor Strickland going to put an end to this madness?" To view the new "land grab" click here.

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - Senator Grendell Introduces SB 189

Senator Tim Grendell introduced a new bill for the Ohio Lakefront Group, SB 189. The co-sponsors include Senators Robert Spada, Randy Gardner, Larry Mumper, Gary Cates and Tim Schaffer. This Bill protects the deeds of shoreline private property owners from illegal takings by the State and restores littoral rights to these owners.

Some of the key items: 1) ..."ordinary high water mark" refers to the level established by the US Army Corps of Engineers for regulatory purposes and shall not be construed to determine property boundaries. 2) If a littoral owner wishes to restore lost lands, ODNR shall bear the burden of proving that the lands were submerged as a result of natural erosion rather than avulsion or artificially induced erosion.

One of the "littoral rights" listed in the Revised Code 1506.01 states that "with respect to lands lost by avulsion" (a sudden loss of land by the action of water or other natural causes) "or artificially induced erosion," you have the right "to restore the lands out to the natural shoreline (the line at which the water usually stands when free from disturbing causes) as it existed at the time of the loss."

In addition, the Bill transfers significant management responsibilities from the Director of ODNR to the Governor and moves major decisions from the Chief of the Office of Coastal Management to the Director. The Office of Coastal Management would have administrative responsibilities only.

Friday, June 1, 2007 - OLG Files Motion for Summary Judgment

On May 30, 2007, OLG filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in Lake County Court of Common Pleas. In essence, this Motion sets forth all the facts from our plaintiff perspective and asks that Judge Lucci issue a ruling in our favor, specifically that our deeds determine the boundaries of our private property. This 36-page motion plus numerous addendums is a lot to absorb, but the key points are:

The conclusion is: “The boundary of the Public Trust is set by statute at the “natural shoreline.” The “natural shoreline” has been interpreted, and should be interpreted here, to be the low water mark or water's edge, as it exists at any point in time. The ordinary high water mark, both in the abstract and as applied here, violates common and legal understandings of the “shoreline” and undermines property rights long-recognized in this state. The public has rights to the water, but none to the private land, even private shores. For all these reasons, the Court should grant plaintiffs motion for summary judgment….”

Click here to view the full motion.

Friday, June 1, 2007 - State Files Motion for Summary Judgment

On May 30, 2007, the State filed their 66 page Motion for Summary Judgment.

The state's motion continues the mantra of owning to the OHWM since statehood. In their summary argument they say: “The ‘territory', consisting of the navigable waters of Lake Erie within Ohio 's territorial boundaries, the lands beneath those waters, and their contents, was vested in the State of Ohio pursuant to the Equal Footing Doctrine of the U.S. Constitution, upon the admission of Ohio into the Union in 1803. The landward terminus of the territory is a question of federal law: the well established answer to which is the Ordinary High Water Mark.”

The State continues to make up the concept that there was an OHWM in 1803 and that it has owned the land since statehood.

If you read the actual ORC it still says: “ It is hereby declared that the waters of Lake Erie consisting of the territory within the boundaries of the state, extending from the southerly shore of Lake Erie to the international boundary line between the United States and Canada, together with the soil beneath and their contents, do now belong and have always, since the organization of the State of Ohio, belonged to the State as proprietor in trust for the people of the state……. subject to ... the property rights of littoral owners …including the right to make reasonable use of waters in front of or flowing past their lands...”

The entire Motion consists of the State's own spin which it has used to confuse the public and get the environmentalists on their side, and with which it hopes to win this lawsuit. Click here to read the full motion.

Friday, April 27, 2007 - OLG President Tony Yankel letter to Governor Strickland

In a letter to Governor Ted Strickland, Tony reiterated Governor Strickland's pre-election statement supporting OLG. It stated:

State Senator Tim Grendell was quoted as saying he is “disappointed” with the lack of progress after meeting over the past months with Strickland Administration officials.

Keith Dailey, speaking for the governor, is quoted as saying, "The governor and his staff are engaged in ongoing discussions. The governor is looking for someway to bring both sides together and bring them to an agreement."

OLG President, Tony Yankel, who was interviewed by phone, said that OLG has had little success in trying to meet with the Governor Strickland and Lt. Governor Lee Fisher. Tony is quoted saying, “ At this point we're getting a little antsy," and noted that it's nearing time for the state to file replies in our ongoing lawsuit against ODNR.

The Register reported that “ Last year, Fisher affirmed the ticket's support for the Ohio Lakefront Group while he campaigned in Erie County and noted the position echoes a legal opinion Fisher wrote as attorney general. Fisher said he and Strickland believe it's wrong “for the state to be infringing on the private property rights of landowners along the lake.””

To read the full article in the Sandusky Register, click this link.

Friday, March 2, 2007 - Judge Lucci Conducts Lawsuit Conference

On Wednesday, February 28, 2007, Judge Lucci conducted a conference by telephone with legal counsel for all parties of the lawsuit and with legal counsel for class members opposing inclusion in the class; i.e. the City of Cleveland and two individuals.

Judge Lucci did not grant the motions filed by the individuals and the City of Cleveland to opt out. He asked that these parties continue to participate in the proceedings to assist the court with issues as they arise.

Judge Lucci advised counsel for the State of Ohio to review the State's current position with Governor Strickland and Attorney General Dann to determine whether the new administration would adopt a policy change. The two intervening defendants, the National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council, indicated that they would fight on if the state adopted the plaintiffs' (OLG) position.

All parties generally discussed types of evidence they believed would be used to support their respective positions when filing summary judgment motions. Among other things, ODNR's legal counsel stated that the State's public trust is not a question of legal title but a question of rights of use.

Judge Lucci did not issue a schedule for the case. Instead, he instructed all parties to discuss a schedule, including deadlines for discovery and filing summary judgment motions, and to jointly present a schedule to him by the end of next week.With regard to pending motions, Judge Lucci stated that he was granting our motion to allow Tim and Kim Rosenberg and Steve Nickel to withdraw as class representatives. Mr. Nickel will remain as a class member.

Friday, March 2, 2007 - OLG Files Motions on Lawsuit

On February 15, 2007, OLG filed three motions with the Court:

The first was the reply to the National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council' Motion to intervene in the lawsuit. In essence, the reply stated that these parties lacked sufficient knowledge or information to support the allegations set forth in their motion. Further, the reply stated that the parties formed legal conclusions for which no response is required. Lastly, the reply denied allegations as contrary to Ohio law. This Reply can be viewed by clicking here.

The second was the Proof of Publication confirming to the Court that legal notices to Class Members were published as directed by the Court. This notice can be viewed by clicking here.

The third was a Motion to the Court to permit withdrawal of two named plaintiffs from the lawsuit. They are three of twelve class members named in the original lawsuit. Two of the original plaintiffs have moved from the State of Ohio and no longer own lakefront property; the third still lives in Ohio but requested to be removed as a plaintiff for personal reasons. the notice can be viewed by clicking here.

Friday, February 23, 2007 - Senator Grendell New Bill for 127th General Assembly

Senator Tim Grendell continues to work on behalf of Ohio Lakefront Group to reintroduce a Bill for this legislative session. He has made a few minor improvements to the Bill (compared to SB 127) that will simply help to clarify our position. This new bill is necessary for the new legislative session, the 127 th Ohio General Assembly which began this year. All bills that were introduced during the past 2-year legislative session died must be introduced and start all over again in the new General Assembly.

This new bill is expected to be introduced as soon as we have co-sponsors. State Senator Randy Gardner has advised Senator Grendell's office that he will be a co-sponsor for the bill.

We expect to have similar legislation introduced into the House of Representatives.

Wednesday, February 9 ,2007 - City of Cleveland Opts Out of Class Action Lawsuit

As of the deadline of February 9, 2007 set by Lake County Common Pleas Court Judge Lucci, the city of Cleveland formally opted out of the Class in our lawsuit against ODNR.

The City of Cleveland stated in its filing with the Court that it “wishes to support the State of Ohio 's position on lakeshore ownership”. It further stated that “The City believes that public access to Lake Erie should be maintained and not diminished.

City of Cleveland can be commended on its lakefront parks and other public works along the Lake Erie Shoreline. However, it too bad that the City did not seem to understand that by opting out of the lawsuit it was not supporting its own lakeshore private property owners. To view the City's motion, click here.

Friday, January 26, 2007 -Last of Legal Ads Run in Area Newspapers (see article below)

The last of three weeks of the Class Suit Notification which began on January 12th ran today. It reads:

"ATTENTION: LAKE SHORE LAND OWNERS Check the legal classified ad in this newspaper for important class action legal notice"

The actual legal notice is quite lengthy, but can be read by clicking here.

There have been questions regarding the wording of the actual Legal Notice. An explanation of the notice can be read by clicking here to read the January 27th e-News.

Wednesday, January 3, 2007 - Amended Order for Notification of Class Members

This week Judge Lucci responded to our motion to amend his order for Class Notification by allowing us to advertise in newspapers of general circulation in counties that abut the shore of Lake Erie in Ohio . The Notice as set forth by Judge Lucci will appear once each week for three consecutive weeks on the same day of each week in the “legal classified” section of the following newspapers:

In addition, a two column wide and one inch high ad will appear simultaneously in the news section of each newspaper.The ad will refer lakeshore land owners to the legal classified section to read the full class action notice.

The first publication of this Legal Notice must occur not later than January 20, 2007. OLG is currently preparing to follow this order as issued. We expect the cost to be between $5000 and $6000. This represents a significant reduction in cost from the original order which we had quoted at $47,706.

To read the entire order from Judge Lucci, click here.

Wednesday, January 3, 2007 - Strickland Names new Director for ODNR

Pending approval by the Ohio Senate, former State Representative Sean Logan will take over as director of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, replacing Sam Speck. Logan would step down as president of the Columbiana County Board of Commissioners. Along with serving as president of the county Board of Commissioners, he also is a member of the Little Beaver Creek Wild and Scenic River Advisory Board.

Mr. Logan served for six years on the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee during his 10-year tenure that ended in 2000 due to term limits.

Mr. Logan said: "From camping and hiking to hunting and fishing, our state parks and bountiful natural resources are a vast source of recreation - and economic strength - for our great state, I look forward to ensuring that Ohio's natural heritage will be enjoyed by Ohioans for generations to come."

Ohio Environmental Council Public Affairs Director Jack Shaner said the governor-elect's choice is familiar with the agency's services and needs given that he hails from a county full of ODNR facilities. Mr Shaner added that control of the Lake Erie shoreline and the related issue of the ‘public trust' has been a lightning rod for controversy and extensive legislative debate in recent years.

Mr. Shaner said his group would be watching to assure Governor-elect Strickland continues to maintain Ohio 's 200-year history of protecting the Lake Erie shoreline.

Friday, December 29th, 2006 - Great Lakes Compact News

Ratification of the Great Lakes Compact has appeared in many newspapers across the Great Lakes States, some pro, some questioning. On December 19th the Akron Beacon Journal wrote a particularly biased article against Senator Tim Grendell's opposition to the “Compact” in the Ohio Senate, where it was still in committee. While it was obvious that the writer had no clue as to the implications of the legislative language that would enact the “Compact”, it extolled Governor Taft and the Ohio House for bringing improved stewardship to the region's most treasured natural resource.

To read the full article, click here.

To the Akron Beacon Journal's credit, they published a rebuttal by Senator Grendell in which he stated “I support the main purpose of the Great Lakes Compact. Preventing extraterritorial diversion of water is good. But the Compact goes far beyond that.”

He further stated that the Great Lakes are not under immediate threat as there is a 1986 federal law prohibiting out-of-basin transfers of water without approval from all of the governors of the Great Lakes states. No other state is approving the Compact. The other states are not hesitating because they are waiting for Ohio to show "leadership.'' They, too, have concerns with the Compact as currently written.

He wrote, “Ten years ago, lakefront property owners expressed concerns with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources' Coastal Management Plan, citing the potential impact its language on the public trust could have on their private-property rights. Those concerns were disregarded at the time, labeled ``exaggerated''. Today, those same landowners are in the middle of an exhausting and expensive legal battle to defend their private-property rights.”

He concluded “We should enact a Compact that prevents water diversion, but only if it does not infringe on Ohioans' private-property rights or make Ohio less competitive for economic development. We owe that to Ohioans, especially since there was no reason to pass it in a rush of hasty meetings during the last weeks of session.”

To read the entire article click here.

Thursday, December 13, 2006 - OLG Asks Judge for Notification Change

As reported on November 14, Judge Lucci ordered that OLG take advertisements in 11 newspapers to run for 3 consecutive weeks beginning no later than December 23rd to notify all potential class members of the lawsuit. OLG has determined the cost of such publication would be $47,706, a truly prohibitive cost for our group. Our motion for consideration notes that our class will receive no monetary gain from this lawsuit and that all funding for the lawsuit has been from voluntary contributions from OLG members.

Our motion requests that Judge Lucci allow us to advertise in the legal classified section of only the seven newspapers distributed along Lake Erie and eliminate advertising in the large State newspapers in Akron, Columbus, and Cincinnati. This would reduce our cost to $3200. The motion also points out that there have been ample news publications in all the newspapers in Ohio since the class was certified by the judge. Many of these articles were attached as exhibits to our motion. It is more likely that these stories have been read by class members, than the proposed advertisement as originally specified by the Judge. We are hopeful that Judge Lucci will honor our motion.

To read the full motion, click here.

Wednesday, December 13, 2006 - House Passes Great Lakes Compact by 82/5 vote

Senator Grendell argues that a provision declaring the waters of the five Great Lakes to be "part of the public trust" would convert existing private property rights to the public domain. He also contends federal law already prohibits water diversion.

But Senator's Grendell, Seitz, and others worry that the language of Dolan's bill could have sweeping legal consequences for groundwater management, property rights along Lake Erie, and the potential impact on water consumption in the state.

Under the Compact, the State gives up its sovereign rights of governance over the entire area specified in the Compact and the Compact governing group would be immune from all law suits or legal action by individuals or states.

Senate spokeswoman Maggie Ostrowski said Thursday that President Bill Harris has sent the Senate Bill (319) to the Rules Committee where unwanted bills sometimes die. The Senate anticipates adjourning the two-year session as early as next week, and Taft leaves office in January due to term limits.

Wednesday, December 6, 2006 - Senate Bill 319, Hearing on Great Lakes Compact

Senate Bill S.B. 319 in committee hearing today threatens the private property rights of every citizen in the State of Ohio . Ratification of the Great Lakes Compact (the subject of this bill) eliminates private property rights and State sovereignty as we know it today. Tony Yankel gave opponent testimony which argued against the broad reach of the Compact and chided ODNR for trying to ram through this legislation in the lame duck session of the General Assembly. He urged that the Senate committee defer hearings on the bill until next year when the new governor and newly elected General Assembly is in session. His testimony seemed to be well received.

To read the press release, click here.To read Tony Yankel's opponent testimony, click here.

Specifically the Great Lakes Compact if ratified by the General Assembly would:

		2008-09 News & Events Host a Neighborhood Meeting (details click here) OLG Presentation Membership Meetings, 2008 (click here) OLG e-News Past weeks (click here) Complete Lawsuit Motions Page (click link) NEWSLETTERS (select & click) January 2009 Newsletter (Word) October 2008 Newsletter (Word) May 2008 Shoreline Views (Word) May 2008 Shoreline Views (PDF) December 2007 - Shoreline Views (Word) July 2007 - Shoreline Views (Word) March 2007 - Shoreline Views (Word) March 2007 - Shoreline Views (PDF) Current News and Events Sunday, May 31, 2009 - Ohio Lakefront Group 2009 Annual Meeting The Ohio Lakefront Group Annual Meeting was held Thursday May 28th at 7:00 PM at the Holiday Inn West on Crocker Road in Westlake . OLG Chairman Greg Baeppler officiated the official business meeting. After opening the meeting, Chairman Baeppler called for a moment of silence is memory of OLG Founder Tom Jordan who passed away April 28th. The first order of business was the election of officers for the 2009-2010 term. The list of nominees for the 2009-2010 fiscal year was presented with an invitation for nominees from the floor. Hearing no other nominees the Secretary cast a vote for election by acclamation. Ten of the past year's officers were re-elected with the addition of Tom Crowley from Vermillion. Click here for the list of officers and their short bios. Treasurer Ken Tatter presented the annual Treasurer's Report. In summary, expenses were $94,000 with income of $102,000 from dues and donations. The balance on December 31, 2008 was $102,000. Ken reflected the Board's appreciation for the financial support of our members. With an eminent appeal to the Supreme Court coming this year, we need to continue to raise money to fund that appeal. The official business meeting was then closed. President Tony Yankel presented a short PowerPoint showing OLG's position since the Governor's policy statement of July 13, 2007 mandating that the ODNR honor the deeds of the lakeshore owners and to desist from charging lease payments for land that is within the deed of the property (notwithstanding the high water mark). Tony stated that the time to obtain a permit is still a year or more and that some have continued to receive invoices for their leases. Some persons who have not paid have received threatening notices from the Ohio Attorney General's Office. During later discussion, ODNR Chief John Watkins stated that they are continuing to work the new rules for approval and that they have not turned over delinquent leases to the AG's office since early last year. He also said ODNR has requested the AG office to stop actions on lease delinquencies that had previously been turned over to them. Our lead attorney Jim Lang reported on the status of the Lawsuit (still awaiting decision by the Appellate Court). He commented on the Oral Arguments held November 18th 2008, playing clips from the actual hearing. The Judges had a number of interesting questions for the State and the National Wildlife Federation/Ohio Environmental Council lawyers. Jim Lang summarized that while other states surrounding the Great Lakes have different boundaries for the Public Trust and different laws, Ohio has it's own unique laws governing private property ownership. He said that much of the State's argument cited Federal case law, while ignoring Ohio case law, which supports ownership to the water's edge or low water mark. Greg Baeppler then gave a short presentation about neighborhood meetings that are conducted to inform all lakeshore property owners of the issue of land taking by the State and to bring in new dues paying and supportive members. These meeting are held in the homes of members for 10-20 people who are invited from the neighborhood by the host. An OLG Board member conducts the meetings providing handouts to the attendees. Meetings can also be held in other locations such as libraries, churches, clubhouses, and civic centers. Click here for more information about setting up a neighborhood meeting After Q & A the meeting was concluded. Friday, December 12 ,2008 - Oral Arguments with Audio Clips As reported in our November 22 e-news, oral arguments took place as scheduled on Tuesday November 18, 2008 at 10:00AM to a packed Lake County courtroom. Below is a very brief summary of the hearing along with specific audio clips that you may find interesting to hear. Presiding Appellate Judge Diane Grendell along with Judge Colleen O'Toole and Judge Timothy Cannon heard oral arguments from all the appellants and cross appellants. Ohio Assistant Attorney General Cynthia Frazzini argued for the State of Ohio . Judge O'Toole asked whom Ms. Frazzini was representing since ODNR (named as defendant in the lawsuit) and the Governor had withdrawn from the lawsuit and obtained separate legal counsel. Ms. Frazzini received several in-depth questions from all the Judges, which clearly indicated that the Judges were very well prepared for the oral arguments. An audio clip of AAG Frazzini's argument can be heard by clicking here. Neil Kagan, counsel for the intervening defendants NWF/OEC spoke next of the public's rights for boating, fishing swimming and recreation on Lake Erie . The judges also asked Mr. Kagan several questions, including a clarification as to what “recreation” included. Mr. Kagen's audio clip can be heard by clicking here. OLG's attorney, Jim Lang, then made the arguments on our appeal. He stated that Judge Lucci's decision was correct in that the furthest landmark point of the Public Trust was to the water's edge. But, that the decision needed to be modified to be the water's edge when the water is free from natural disturbances, such as storms. He noted that modification was consistent with Ohio case law and even a previous Attorney General's opinion. Mr. Lang's audio clips can be heard by clicking here, part 1, part 2. Homer Taft, representing himself, spoke next. Mr. Taft argued that Judge Lucci's decision erred in allowing cross defendents NWF/OEC to intervene, in reforming the deeds to the waters edge, and in not addressing the littoral rights of upland property owners. He argued further that all reference to the public trust include only water and land under water, but never specified dry land. Mr. Taft's audio clip can be heard by clicking here. Scott Duncan, representing himself and his wife, spoke next and addressed primarily Lake Erie 's western basin, originally called the “firelands.” He traced the deeds for that area (which in fact are true for all of the land abutting Lake Erie) back to 1792 when the land was sold by the Connecticut Land Company. He also noted the extremes between low water and high water in the western basin due to the very slight slope of the land as compared with the eastern areas of the lake with cliffs. He agreed with Judge Lucci's decision regarding the water's edge, but urged that Judge Lucci's reforming of the deeds to the shoreline be reversed. Mr. Duncan's audio clip can be heard by clicking here. Ms. Frazzini, Mr. Kagan and Mr. Lang then each had a few minutes for rebuttals. The rebuttal audio clips can be heard by clicking here. We expect that the Appellate Court will release its decision sometime in the Spring. Saturday, November 15th, 2008 - State Files to Have Judge Diane Grendell Disqualified - Oral Arguments Still Scheduled On April 8th, the State of Ohio filed an affidavit with the Ohio Supreme Court to have Judge Diane Grendell disqualified from the panel of judges who will hear our lawsuit appeal. On Friday, one of our attorneys at Calfee, Halter, and Griswold reported that he received a phone call from a reliable source at the Ohio Supreme Court stating that Chief Justice Moyer just issued an opinion denying the affidavit of disqualification. He said that we should have the written opinion on Monday morning. If you are interested in reading the extensive Affidavit of Disqualification filed by the State, you may do so by clicking this link. Oral arguments are still scheduled for Tuesday November 18, 2008 at 10:00AM in the Lake County Courthouse in Painesville at 47 North Park Place. The Court will hear the appeal by the State of Ohio, and consecutively, the appeal by NWF/OEC. Each side will have just 15 minutes to speak in both cases. Therefore, the entire proceeding for both cases should be concluded within one hour. We expect that it will be sometime in the Spring that the Appellate Court will release their decision. Saturday, October 4, 2008 - Constitutional Amendment Issue 3 on November Ballot A number of members have had questions regarding OLG's position on this issue. OLG strongly favors passage of this very important issue to amend the State Constitution to protect private property rights in ground water, lakes, and other watercourses. It affects you as Lake Erie shoreline property owners. This proposed Amendment would: 1. Make explicit that a private property owner has a right to make reasonable use of the ground water that lies beneath the owner's land, although this right is subordinate to the public welfare. 2. Make explicit that a private property owner who owns land on the border of a lake or other watercourse has a right to make reasonable use of the water in such lake or watercourse located on or flowing through the owner's land, although this right is subordinate to the public welfare. 3. Not affect the public's use of Lake Erie and other navigable waters of the state. 4. Prevent the rights confirmed under this proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution from being impaired or limited by the operation of other sections of the Ohio Constitution. If approved, this amendment takes effect December 1, 2008. A majority YES vote is required for the amendment to be adopted. VOTE YES ON THIS ISSUE! Click this link to read the Issue as posted on the November ballot. Saturday, October 4, 2008 - OLG Survey to Ohio Legislative Candidates We reported in an earlier e-News that OLG sent a survey to all 210 candidates who are running for election or re-election in November. We asked 4 questions: • What will you do to protect private property? • What is your position on the Constitutional Amendment issue? • What is your position on our SB 189? • Will you co-sponsor legislation to insure property rights? The responses have been coming in very slow having received on 12 to date. As we receive responses we will post them on our website beginning this coming week. Please urge the candidates running in your district to respond. September 30. 2008 - OLG Final Comments on New ODNR Rules OLG filed its final comments to the proposed new rules. Specific points made in our response are: • The rules overreach in defining the scope of the Coastal Management Program • The rules fail to acknowledge the Merrill Decision in crucial definitions • An unwelcome reference to “public trails” is included in the rules • Application requirements are unreasonable due to the burden and expense of obtaining required data • All Hearings should be held in the geographic area of the applicant • Inspection of projects lacks permission by property owner • ODNR retains unlimited power to remove structures and fills. Developments or improvements should be limited to respect existing rights This summary of concerns concludes that while the Ohio Lakefront Group and its members understand the need for regulations, ODNR needs to adopt reasonable regulations that acknowledge current law, respect existing rights and provide clarity and certainty to applicants and current lease or permit holders alike. To view the actual submission, click this link . Also, click this link for comments submitted by Homer Taft whose separate lawsuit has been linked to OLG's lawsuit. Friday, August 21, 2008 OLG files Final reply Brief to Appellate Court The question before the trial court and now the appellate court is where the boundary of Ohio's Public trust lies; The OHWM where the water almost never reaches; where the water stands now regardless of disturbing causes; a moving boundary where the water is when affected by disturbing causes; a fixed line based on navigability where the water always flows (low water mark). OLG has continuously taken the stand that the boundary between public and private “is the line at which the water stands when free from disturbing causes”. This is consistent with Ohio Revised Code. The lawsuit is not about beach walking. However, OLG also concludes that the trial court erred in reforming all property boundaries to a single boundary as this excludes all previously established property rights.. While ODNR claims to have never given private rights to submerged lands, it has long been established that such transfers took place especially in Sandusky where much of the land is fill. Needless to say, many other properties have property lines established well into the (presently) submerged lands of Lake Erie as affirmed on a case-by-case basis by both the U.S. and Ohio Supreme Courts. The State can only show that it is administratively convenient to use the OHWM in administering their lease program. From the late 1700s through 1989 – the year ODNR assumed public trust authority over Lake Erie – private littoral landowners in Ohio owned and controlled their shores without challenges from the State. In 1989, ODNR begun its lease program with benefit going only to the State in the form of fees paid for leases (with a percentage going back to the municipality) . Leases also prevented the public from use of the leased land. Paying a lease entitles the leaseholder to exclusive use of the land, except as it may affect navigation. No matter what face the State attempts to put on their attempts to steal our land, it can only be best characterized as one of the biggest land grabs in the history of the State. To read the entire brief, click here. Friday, August 15, 2008 - ODNR Announces Public Meetings for Comment on Proposed New Rules for Leases and Permits The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Office of Coastal Management announced in a press release that they are sponsoring meetings to solicit input on proposed Ohio Administrative Code rules for managing construction and improvements along the shore. The rules reflect the new policy for managing the state's coastal lands that was announced by Governor Ted Strickland on July 13, 2007. These updates reflect (1) the Governor's Policy, (2) the Lawsuit Decision in OLG's favor, and (3) incorporate public comments received since the initial set of draft rules were announced in September 2007. While significant improvement has been made in the new rules, there are still some issues and questions that you may have. Those who want to compare the proposed rules as they are currently worded with what was initially proposed by ODNR may do so at www.ohiodnr.com/coastal/ and select "Land Management". A summary of rules changes is also included on this page. Click on Download the latest Draft OAC Rules 1501-6-01 to 1501-6-40. Please note, the black text is existing rule, the blue text represents changes and the green text is intended to provide clarity on the reason for requesting the information. Public informational meetings on the proposed rules are scheduled for 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the following dates and locations: Thursday, September 4 - Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge 14000 West State Route 2 in Oak Harbor , Ottawa County Thursday, September 11- Painesville Township Park 1025 Hardy Road in Painesville , Lake County Thursday, September 18 - Don Umerley Civic Center 21016 Hilliard Boulevard in Rocky River , Cuyahoga County You are encouraged to attend the meeting nearest you to hear about changes and the rules and to ask questions or provide input. We suggest that any suggestions. comments, and concerns be submitted in writing to OCM during or after the meeting. Additional information on the proposed Ohio Administrative Code rules and the upcoming public meetings is available by calling Liz Everhard, Office of Coastal Management at (419) 626-7980. Friday, July 25, 2008 - State Consolidated Reply & Answer Brief Some observations of the 53-page brief filed by the State include: • The State is again trying to eliminate the private property issue by stating that Lake Erie is not real property, but goes further to state that the shore in included in Lake Erie, despite the ORC definition. They try to substitute the shoreline for the navigable waters and then conclude that the shoreline is the OHWM. They also claim that the “Equal Footing Doctrine” gave the State ownership to the OHWM; not true according to our previous brief. • The State Attorney General defends his position to continue this lawsuit giving rationale for nearly a page. • This brief defends ODNR methodology to set the lakeward boundary of the territory, while previous briefs said that only the State can set boundaries and that ODNR had no such authority. They also fail to mention that the Ohio Public Trust Doctrine was actually changed from the “shoreline” to the OHWM by ODNR Office of Coastal Management. • The state mistakenly and repeatedly refers to the OHWM of Lake Erie back in the 1700's and at Statehood and beyond. The OHWM for Lake Erie as defined by the Army Corps of Engineers was not set until 1952. • The State references law regarding navigable waters of Lake Erie and then uses a circular rationalize that navigable water extends over the shore to the OHWM. • The state quotes from ORC, “the waters of Lake Erie …. together with the soil beneath and their contents…” in their definition of Public Trust, but glibly add “to the OHWM” at every reference. • The State opines that the Lake is not defined by surveys, only private property. One must wonder how the State defines IGLD 573.4 without surveys. It must be noted that our lawsuit was to cause the State to provide legal evidence of the furthest landward boundary of the Public Trust. Thus far, the State can only attempt to infer OHWM, then use law references that state, “shoreline” and “beneath navigable waters” as their evidence through circular rational. • The State loves to put in bold type such statements as “ The furthest landward boundary of the territory is the ordinary high water mark as a matter of law, and that line be located using 573.4 IGLD (1985)” It seems apparent that the bold letters are intended to make the statement appear to be true, rather than simply the State's opinion. • The over-riding argument being made by the State is that the definition of the shoreline is neither the shoreline nor the low water mark, but in fact pertains only to the OHWM to which the State has had ownership of since 1803 (when there was no OHWM). One argument never brought out in any of the briefs, in my opinion, is that the original physical boundary of Lake Erie was significantly different at Statehood than today. Everyone who has lived on the lake for a long period knows that erosion due to natural and artificial causes has moved the lake water southward over land that had previously been dry beach for centuries. This is property that was originally private, but lost to the Lake and never recovered. Private property owners have lost property due to these erosion events, and some continue to lose beach property. The State wants to further take privately owned land due to these natural and artificial processes over the past 100 years. The above is the opinion of the author of this article and represents no legal position. Click here to read the entire brief. Monday, July 14,2007 - OLG Files Reply Brief to Intervening Defendants Today OLG filed its brief with the Appellate Court to Intervening Defendants, the National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council. In our leading argument we refer to defendants misinterpretation of the Ohio Supreme Court Case, Sloan v. Biemiller. In the words of the Sloan case there exists a “proprietor of the shores” who is “owner of the premises”, who can convey “all the estate and interest in the land” and has express authority to “grant” or “reserve” the right to “land on or occupy the shore”. In establishing private ownership of the shores, Sloan established private ownership to the low water mark. In referencing State v. Cleveland & Pittsburgh, the Court found that “the title and rights of riparian and littoral owners in the sub-aqueous soil of the navigable waters within the limits of the State are governed by the laws of the State…” This holding is consistent with 1506.10 and .11 with reference to “the soil beneath the waters of Lake Erie” and to “the lands presently underlying the waters of Lake Erie”. (One should notice how our briefs quote State and case law, whereby the defendants tend to interpret and paraphrase.) Again by misinterpretation defendants argue that the Equal Footing Doctrine bound the States to a definition of the boundary of the public trust. Rather, it freed the states to define their own boundary. In a Massachusetts case it was settled by the Court that “the title of the owner of land bounded by tide water extends from the high water mark over the shore or flat to the low water mark. This was a great deviation from the English Common Law so frequently referenced by defendants. There are many cases where English Common Law has been over-ridden by State law. Further, OLG refers to Intervening Appellants “imaginary federal common law”. Having misconstrued Ohio Common Law, Intervening Appellants conclude that the (federal) Fleming Act adopted the OHWM as the boundary for all states. Clearly, the only settled rule in Ohio is that the boundary is “the line at which the water usually stands free from disturbing causes”. Recall that the State is the authority on setting the boundary of the public trust. The conclusion of the brief states that Intervening Appellants cite no Ohio authority establishing a boundary at the OHWM. The statutes, understandings and express holding in Ohio have consistently placed the boundary at the low water mark. OLG asks that the Court set the boundary as a matter of law, at the low water mark. To read the entire brief click here. Friday, July 4, 2008 - National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council File Appeal Reply Brief On the week preceding Independence Day the “Conservationists” filed their appeal brief. The “Conservationists”, as they now call themselves, are the National Wildlife Federation and the Ohio Environmental Council. It is interesting to note that on this Independence Day weekend the initial argument posed is based on British common law. I thought Independence Day was all about a complete and total separation from Britain. British common law seems to appear in both the State and the Conservationist's arguments. Conservationists further argue that only the State, not ODNR, has the right to establish boundaries for Lake Erie. However, most of their further discussion about the OHWM hinges on rules established by ODNR. It is ODNR, not the State that created the current land grab from its private citizens. Appellants quote from case law providing that the State “controls” the navigable waters up to the OHWM. Control has always been within OLG's concept of the State's responsibility, but not “ownership”. This seems to be an area that is much confused in their arguments. The OHWM is a regulatory line rather than a property line. The Conservationists continue to use "well established" Ohio common law in their arguments. Ohio Revised Code (ORC) always takes precedent over common law. The ORC definition found at 1506.10 clearly defines the boundary of the territory of Lake Erie to include only the submerged lands of Lake Erie. All of the cases cited by the Conservationists use the words “covered by water”, or “owns the bed”, or “fishing from navigable waters”. Nowhere do they cite case law allowing fishing from private beaches or the public owning the shore not covered by water. They also seem to misunderstand the concept of littoral property rights. They state that littoral property owners have the right to wharf out to navigable waters (among other rights), but the littoral property owner does not own the property being used to wharf out. This may be true. However, the littoral property owner is wharfing out from his private property across the submerged land, in the public trust. The littoral property owner has always applied for necessary permits to erect structures in the water. The issue is about deeded private property, not littoral rights. While the conservationists arguments seem to be better prepared than the State's, they are equally circuitous and contradictory. The full brief can be viewed by clicking here. The above is the opinion of this author and does not represent any legal position regarding the lawsuit. Friday, May 30, 2008 - OLG Files Appeal Brief Response to State and Cross Appeal This past week, OLG filed its brief with the 11thth District State Court of Appeal. The entire 45 page brief is posted on the website and can be viewed by clicking here. Key points in the reply brief are: · The Low Water mark has historically been the end of the “Public Trust” and has been recognized as such in State documentation from 1970 through 1997 when ODNR took the position of Ordinary High Water mark. Also, Low Water and “where land and water meet” have been synonymous in the past. Lee Fisher as Attorney General affirmed this in his 1993 Opinion. In 2007 ODNR abandoned the OHWM position in response to the Governor's policy. Only the State A.G. office now fights for OHWM. · OHWM does not apply to Lake Erie as a non-tidal body of water. The Army Corps of Engineers established OHWM in 1974 for regulation of navigable waters only. The State later used a 1982 to 1988 level of 573.4 based on only 6 years of unusually high water levels to establish its OHWM. The rules established at that time did not comply with rule making requirements established by law and are therefore invalid. Also, the State Appeal often refers to Federal Law, which has never applied to the State's definition of “territory” or private property. · The Ohio Supreme Court since 1895 has always supported the rights of private property owners to exclude others from their shore, i.e. “land bordering, but not currently beneath, the waters of Lake Erie”. · The State's reliance on a federal court case to support their appeal could not have been more wrong in that the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the cited case. It is incredulous that the State missed this reversal, making their argument null and void. Other cases on which the State relied were equally flawed in upholding the State's position. · The State misstated and mistakes Ohio authority in trying to prove error in the Trial Court. The Trial Court relied on (1) Ohio Supreme Court precedent, (2) ODNR rules, (3) Ohio Attorney General opinions and (4) traditional property rights. Key Points in the Cross-Appeal are: · The Trial Court erred in not establishing the Low Water Mark as the boundary of the “territory”. Common usage sets the “shoreline” at the Low Water Mark. Since 1890, Ohio Common Law has equated Low Water Mark with the “water's edge, “margin”, or “edge of the water”. · ODNR has abandoned the OHWM as the boundary for the “territory” when they withdrew from the lawsuit. Only the State A. G. office continues this wasteful battle against private property owners. · Both common and technical usage shows that the “territory” sits at the low water mark, which the Trial Court did not recognize. The Appellate Court should reverse the Trial Court on not recognizing the Low Water mark as the boundary of the “territory”. · None of the parties to the suit requested that littoral property owner deeds be reformed. At a minimum, littoral property owners hold title to the water's edge. However some deeds include lands that have been filled or extend into the lake. Previous court cases have supported those deeds. The Trial Court's order to reform deeds was in error and should be reversed. Homer Taft, and Scott and Darla Duncan, whose individual lawsuits have been joined in our lawsuit against the State since the Trial Court, also filed Appeal Reply Briefs. Click for: Duncan; Taft. Friday, May 30, 2008 - Great Lakes Compact – Constitutional Amendment Fails in House The Constitutional Amendment Joint Resolution that passed the Senate with a resounding 33-0 vote last week was defeated in the House by a 58-37 vote, just two votes short of passing. The Joint Resolution if passed would have put the Constitutional Amendment on November's ballot asking the people of Ohio vote on its ratification. If ratified this amendment would have given private property owners protection against making their ground waters, non-navigable streams, and ponds subject to the public trust implications in the Compact. We congratulate those Representatives who voted for the Joint Resolution and who support our private property rights. Those representatives who voted against the resolution are either ignorant of the purpose of the amendment or very anti-private property rights in Ohio. In either case those vetoes need to be addressed by our membership with emails and phone calls. They are not only against those of us who live on the shores of Lake Erie, but also against private property owners who live on any non-navigable stream or pond or who draw their water from wells within the Lake Erie basin. Following is the list of yeas and nays from the House. Votes For (58): Adams Aslanides Bacon Batchelder Blessing Bolon Brady Brinkman Carmichael Coley Collier Combs Core Daniel DeWine Dodd Dolan Evans Fende Fessler Flowers Gardner Gibbs Goodwin Hagan Hite Hottinger Huffman Hughes Jones Lundy Mandel McGregor J. McGregor R. Mecklenborg Newcomb Oelslager Okey Patton Peterson Raussen Reinhard Schindel Schlichter Schneider Sears Setzer Stebelton Stewart Uecker Wachtmann Wagner Webster White Widener Wolpert Zehringer Husted Votes Against (37): Beatty Book Boyd Brown Budish Celeste Chandler DeBose DeGeeter Domenick Driehaus Dyer Foley Garrison Gerberry Goyal Harwood Heard Heydinger Koziura Letson Luckie Mallory Miller Otterman Sayre Skindell Slesnick Stewart D. Strahorn Sykes Szollosi Ujvagi Williams B. Williams S. Yates Yuko Friday, May 23, 2008 - Ohio Lakefront Group Annual Meeting The OLG Annual Meeting was held at the Holiday In West in Westlake on May 22, 2008. OLG Chairman Jim Resar led the meeting. Treasurer, Ken Tatter presented the Treasurer's Report for the year 2007. He reported that for the year there was an expenditure of $120,000 primarily all of which was spent in fighting the lawsuit. He reported a net loss for the year with a year ending balance of just over $69,000. In response to a question about the treasurer's report, OLG President Tony Yankel stated that he expected 2008 expenditures to be as much as $200,000 fighting the appeal. The Treasurer's Report was approved as presented. Board members Bob Merrill and Ken Tatter then presented the proposed slate for the 2008-9 Board of Trustees. There was a call for nominations from the floor; there were none. A motion was made and seconded that the slate as presented be elected unanimously. The motion passed. The Board of Trustees are: Greg Baeppler, Vitas Cyvas, Kent Kemmerer , Bob Merrill, Nancy Plymale, Mike Prout, Rick Rennell, Jim Resar, Ken Tatter , Charles Tilk, and Tony Yankel. Tony Yankel gave an update leading off saying: “We have won our lawsuit but our victory has been appealed”! He again reviewed the Governor's statement and leasing policy which allowed that while the Governor acknowledges that we own our land, we may still VOLUNTARLY make lease payments. So if anyone wants to voluntarily make lease payments, you are free to do so when you are sent invoices for submerged lands leases for land that you own. He then went over the ABCD property dispute that he presented last year and that started over 1 ½ years ago. It has still not been settled by ODNR. Tony brought to our attention a new ploy on the part of many municipalities and townships called Riparian Setbacks. These are zoning ordinances described as “no cut” zones requiring that the land on any watercourse be preserved in its natural state a minimum of 75 feet from the watercourse. In some flood areas, the “no cut” zone may extend 150 feet or more. A watercourse is defined as “any natural, perennial, or intermittent lake, pond, channel, stream, river, creek, or brook…” This appears as another scary government attempt to take over private property. Jim Lang, lead attorney for OLG in our lawsuit gave us an update. The State of Ohio and the National Wildlife Federation with the Ohio Environmental Council (NWFOEC) have filed their Appeal Briefs. We have returned our response to the NWF/OEC. We expect to return our response to the State this coming week. Jim expects that the 11 th District Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in the fall of the year with a ruling in the late first quarter of 2009. After that any appeal will move to the Ohio Supreme Court, if not by the State, most likely by the NWF/OEC. Greg Baeppler made a presentation on Neighborhood Meetings. Greg has taken on this responsibility to help you get neighbors informed and involved and to have them join OLG to further increase our political presence in the State. These meeting can be held in your home, yard, church, community center, yacht club, or marina. All you need to do is invite the guests and Greg and OLG will provide the rest. For more information visit our website on the What you can Do page. You can contact Greg at 216-577-6811 or gbaeppler@att.net . Tony did a wrap up prior to introducing Senator Tim Grendell . Tony made four points on how we can all make OLG successful in our private property rights fight. They are: • Get involved • Contribute – are funds are diminishing • Inform others and get them to join • Hold Neighborhood meetings Senator Tim Grendell spoke primarily about the Great Lakes Basin Compact and how it, as currently written, can negate our lawsuit. See the May 24th e-News to read about his presentation. As always, Tim continues his fight for private property rights, whether on the lake or inland waters. He is a staunch Constitution supporter and plans to see our fight to the end. Tim always gives an inspiring talk and this was no exception. He plans to retain his Senate seat in the upcoming election so that he can continue this important fight. The meeting and presentations ended at 9:00 PM The Power Point Presentation may be accessed by clicking here. Monday, May 12, 2008 – Public Trust Doctrine The “Public Trust Doctrine” as it is currently understood and practiced was created by Joseph Sax in an article published in the Michigan Law Review in 1970. A short introduction to the article, debunking Sax' is posted by the Berkeley Electronic Press. That post includes other articles discussing the pros and cons of the public trust as defined by Sax. To read this short introduction, as well as the lengthy article, click here. Friday, April 18, 2008 - State of Ohio Files Appeal Brief with Appellate Court On April 17, 2008 the State of Ohio filed its 58 page brief with the Appellate Court. Much of the brief restates what had been previously presented in the original case and citing numerous other court cases that the State believes will support their appeal. The State continues to use the IGLD (International Great Lakes Datum) of 573.4 feet as the ordinary high water mark since statehood and cites Ohio revised code, which never mentions the IGLD. One key argument by the State is that the Court relied on “Historical records” dealing with this case as one of a real property rather than one of public trust rights. In other words, it appears that the State is claiming that private property rights are not at issue here. Of course, the State cited the Michigan case where the Supreme Court ruled that the public had the right to walk on the beaches of private property owners. (The Michigan law in fact specifically used ordinary high water mark within its context, whereby the Ohio Revised Code does not.) The State found fault with the Court's ruling, holding that it was inconsistent with “(1) Ohio Supreme Court precedent; (2) Ohio Department of Natural Resources rules; (3) the Ohio Attorney General's position on the issue; and (4) traditional property rights.” Several important reasons for the ruling seem to have been left out. They are the Constitution of the United States , the Ohio Constitution, Ohio Revised Code, and the legal deeds of private property owners. The State continues its same distorted interpretation of Ohio law, hoping that the appeals court will not see through their charade. As Judge Lucci has shown, the courts are not easily swayed by repetition and skewed interpretations of the law. The OLG continues to stand by our belief that the U.S. Constitution, the Ohio Constitution, the Ohio Revised Code, and our property deeds are on our side and will prevail over the State. Our deeds have stood on Lake Erie since before statehood. Their legality should not b altered at the whim of a state agency, extreme environmentalists, or sports hunting groups. To read the full (58 page) brief, click here. Monday, April 7, 2008 - National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council File Appeal Briefs The National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council (NWF/OEC filed their Appeal Brief with the Appellate Court on April 7th. There appears to be no relevant new information that has not come before the Court before the Appeal. The assertions by NWF/OEC in their brief are as follows: “The trial court erred in holding that the public trust in Lake Erie is demarcated by the line the water of the lake touches at any given time.” "The trial court erred in holding that the Ohio Department of Natural Resources may not use the IGLD elevation to establish the high water mark of Lake Erie.” "The trial court erred in holding that the littoral property owners may exclude the people from using the lands below the high water mark of Lake Erie. Numerous Federal and State trial cases are cited in their brief, including cases involving rivers and tidal waters. Lake Erie is not tidal water. They also exhibited an economic analysis, which stated: “The beauty and excitement of the lake draws millions of visitors to it each year. They come to experience the rich maritime history, walk its windswept beaches, canoe scenic tributaries, and climb beautiful lighthouses. In addition to direct expenditures the effect of visitors taking part in these activities is the creation of more than 130,000 jobs and the generation of more than $400,000 in state and local taxes.” It appears that the economy is doing well without the trespass on private property. The economic analysis does not consider private property in its analysis. A number of affidavits were attached from individuals who claim they have walked the “private” beaches for years and intend to do so in the future. So it would appear that private property owners have not damaged these people. However, the NWF/OEC states they want accessibility to beaches on private property to “picnic, bird watch, exercise…. (and to) canoe or swim from the shore. While one cannot speculate on what the court may think of the arguments set forth by NWF/OEC, there still appears to be no compelling argument to invalidate private property deeds that have stood on Lake Erie since well before Ohio's statehood. To read the full brief, click here. Friday, February 1, 2008 - OLG Files Motions on State's Motion for Stay OLG Plaintiffs filed motions in response to the “State of Ohio's Motion for Stay of Execution of Judgment pending Appeal” Two motions were filed. The first took issue with false assertions made by the State. The state cited a similar case involving ODNR's unconstitutional taking of property. The “Stay for Fees” was ultimately heard in the State Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of granting the plaintiff fees and against the State. The State's claim clearly contradicted the case law cited by the State. Also, one of the Assistant Attorneys General signing the State's Motion for Stay, was council to ODNR in the cited case and surely knew that the outcome was otherwise than that presented by the State. It appears that the State is not only giving misinformation, as has the ODNR since the inception of our lawsuit, but the State is trying to fool the Courts with their false claims. Hopefully, the Court will not be fooled and will rule on the truth of the law. The second motion filed by OLG Plaintiffs simply applies logic to the State's Motion for Stay. By requesting a Stay, the State is merely extending the period for damages resulting in the State's “temporary” taking of private property. OLG expects that, at a minimum, appropriate damages will include refunding of submerged lands lease payments wrongfully collected as well as other fees that property owners incurred such as engineering fees or mitigation fees. Plaintiffs could also pursue compensation, calculated using market-based lease rates over a multi-year period for the private property wrongfully taken as well as damages to the residual property to the extent that the State's conduct devalued the market value of Plaintiff's littoral property. Simply stated, the State's request for Stay could prove to be economically injurious to the State in the long run, costing the taxpayers more money. The motions can be viewed by clicking the following links: Motion 1 Motion 2 Friday, January 25, 2008 - Great Lakes Compact - Giving Away Ohio's Most Significant Natural Resource While the State is telling Ohioans how lakeshore property owners are stealing the beaches from all of the people of Ohio (ongoing disinformation), the State is also asking that the legislature ratify the Great Lakes Compact, which will potentially remove all jurisdiction by the State over the entire Lake Erie as well as all streams and bodies of water in the Lake Erie Basin, including groundwater. The compact may prevent any property owners or fishers in Lake Erie from taking water from Lake Erie and the entire Lake Erie watershed. This may require well owners, farmers, and other who use ground water to obtain permits to use their own ground water for their use and livelihood upon which they depend. Further, the rule stating only 5.7 gallons may be removed from the lake by an individual will certainly affect fishermen who may use a 10 gallon container in which to hold their catch of fish. Entering into this Compact will supercede all current legislation and private and public property rights that have been in place since the formation of the State in 1803. The rush to ratify this Compact will affect every Ohioan now and in the forever future. To read a synopsis of the misconceptions and facts about the Compact along with problems and solutions, click this link. Friday. January 11, 2008 - Notices of Appeal Filed by State AG, NWF, and OEC On January 10th Attorney General Dann filed a Notice of Appeal with the Court. On the same date the National Wildlife Federation and the Ohio Environmental Council duly filed their Notices of Appeal. A Notice of Appeal is simply a form that is filled out stating technical case information (plaintiffs, defendants, case number, etc.) and filed with the Appeals Court. The appeals were filed in the 11th District Court of Appeal, which includes Lake County where the original case was heard. On January 20th, OLG filed a Notice of Cross-Appeal. Homer Taft filed a cross-appeal. Intervening Plaintiffs Taft and Duncan's lawsuit was combined with our lawsuit in the class action. The cross-appeal gives us an opportunity to focus on items in the decision of interest to lakeshore property owners at the same time fighting the State AG's appeal. Once the case is assigned to a Judge, the Motions from the State, NWF, and OEC will begin and we expect the legal expenses to begin to pile on, once again. Friday, January 11, 2008 - OLG Files Motion for Fees In our brief, filed January 10th, we have requested the court to award fees in the total amount of our legal costs in defending the property rights of littoral property owners against the State. In our motion we stated that we were faced with the challenge of property ownership by the State, who ignored AG Lee Fisher's opinion in 1993 that the water's edge was the boundary of the State's territory in Lake Erie. The State deliberately defied the law, but was defeated in Court and OLG has statutory rights to an award of fees as the prevailing party. The brief includes a short synopsis of the court action beginning with our initial filing on May 28, 2004, the removal of the case, by the State, to Federal Court in February 2005 and return to Lake County Court in June of 2006. The case was certified as a Class Action on June 9, 2006. After another 14 months of motions by both sides, the Court issued a Summary Judgment in our favor or December 11, 2007. OLG seeks to recover $303,442.74 in payments for legal costs associated with our lawsuit. While statute allows for an award of fees, the Judge must determine whether fees will be paid, in whole or in part. Meanwhile, the State has filed for a Motion for Stay of the Judge's order until the appeal has been completed. We expect that the Court will grant this Stay. In summary, we cannot depend on receiving any funds from the lawsuit to continue our battle against the appeals. To read the full Motion, click here. Tuesday, December 11, 2007 - Lake County Common Pleas Court, Judge Lucci Rules in Favor of OLG The following is a press release issued by OLG President Tony Yankel today: This is a great day for the Ohio Lakefront Group and for anyone in Ohio that owns private property. Today, Judge Lucci of Lake County Common Pleas Court ruled in a class action suit that the property owners along the Lake Erie shoreline own the land consistent with their deeds, and to the water's edge The lawsuit was filed in May 2004 in response to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources' unsubstantiated claims of state ownership of private property under the Taft Administration, and then forcing private property owners to lease their own property back from the State. Prior to Ohio 's statehood, our deeds said this property belongs to us. Since statehood, Ohio law and our deeds said this property belongs to us. In 1993, then Ohio Attorney General Lee Fisher agreed and said that the land to the water's edge belongs to the property owner and was not public property. A few months ago Governor Strickland said he would honor our deeds unless a court decided otherwise. And now we have a Court ruling that upholds our position. This has been a long and expensive fight for our members. It has been disturbing to actually witness the State of Ohio simply invalidating deeds because a few bureaucrats decided to ignore the law and rewrite history. Hopefully the Court's decision puts an end to this ridiculous government taking of private property. Significant points of Judge Lucci's decision include: “In summary, and as explained in more detail in the Court's Order, the court concludes that: (1) each owner of Ohio real estate that touches Lake Erie owns title lakeward as far as the water's edge;” (page 68) “The court agrees with the attorney general [Lee Fisher]'s opinion.” (page 58) “The State of Ohio does not have the authority to require littoral owners to lease the portion of the shore that lies above the water's edge.” (page 74) “This court also agrees with the plaintiffs' assessment of the Michigan case of Glass v. Goeckel as being poorly decided, and as not disturbing the littoral owner's title to the water's edge… In addition, the court agrees that ‘Ohio's land grant history is unique and clearly distinguishes its applicable boundary law from that of western states admitted to the union more than half a century later from public lands.'” (Page 67) “Accordingly, as long as members of the public are willing to fish from boats on the water, or by standing in the waters of Lake Erie, littoral landowners have no right to stop them from doing so. However, under Biemiller , littoral landowners do have the right to exclude people from standing on the dry shore of the littoral landowner's property.” (page 57) “…the court denies the motion for summary judgment of the Defendants-Respondents State of Ohio and ODNR; and the court denies the motion for summary judgment of Intervening Defendants NWF and OEC.” (page 75) The Ohio Lakefront Group is a non-profit organization of over 6,000 members that live along the shore of Lake Erie . To read the full order by Judge Lucci, click here. Saturday, December 1, 2007 - Great Lakes Compact in the News Several news articles have been written about the Great Lakes Compact lately, much in the favor of environmentalists who now say that climate change appears likely to reduce already low Great Lakes water levels even further, making it more urgent to approve a regional compact protecting the waters of the Great Lakes from diversion and overuse. The primary objective of the Compact between the 8 Great Lakes States and 2 Canadian Provinces is to stop the taking of fresh water from the Great Lakes watershed, which would reduce the total amount of fresh water remaining in the Lakes. This is a very worthy goal, however as is often the case, the devil is in the details. (Note that a federal statute already does provide such protection.) In last year's Ohio Senate hearings, OLG President Tony Yankel testified before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in opposition to the Compact. He expressed the concern that Ohio Lakefront Group members have for the Compact as written, especially the provision that would expand the Public Trust Doctrine to all ground and surface water in the Great Lakes watershed. Senator Tim Grendell argued that a provision declaring the waters of the five Great Lakes to be “part of the public trust” would convert existing private property rights to the public domain. Under the Compact, the State gives up its sovereign rights of governance over the entire area specified in the Compact and the Compact's governing group would be immune from all legal actions by individuals or states. A special task force recommended by Senator Grendell is charged with review of the Compact to make corrective changes to “fix” the Compact before it comes to a vote by the General Assembly. While some states have already passed the Compact, other states, such as Wisconsin share the concerns voiced by Senator Grendell. Environmentalists are strongly proposing immediate passage of the Compact as written. We as OLG members, along with anyone who lives in the Lake Erie watershed, need to be concerned about passage. Without the fixes that allow the State of Ohio to retain State sovereignty and private property owners to be assured that property rights are not diminished, the Compact should not be approved. Friday, November 23, 2007 - Huron River Greenway Property Owners Victorious Information as reported by Tom Jackson in the Sandusky Register on November 22, 2007: In a lawsuit filed by property owners, (CPPR “Citizens for the Protection of Property Rights”) , along the Huron River Greenway which was developed by Erie Metro Parks, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the taking of property by the park system was illegal. The original lawsuit was filed in 1997. The court ordered the park system to begin figuring out how to compensate property owners who have claimed ownership of the land that became the Huron River Greenway. The ruling by the court was 6-0. (Justice Terrence O'Donnell did not participate in the ruling.) This is a huge win for property owners throughout the state engaged in similar battles with governmental authorities. Nels Ackerson of Washington, DC, attorney for the plaintiffs said: The ruling is important because it upholds the principal of the U.S. Constitution that government with the “awesome power” to take private land for public purposes must provide just compensation (for the land owners). “It is a very substantial case. It's a landmark case. It's a result of a great deal of persistence and efforts by he landowners,” Ackerson said. “It's very gratifying to know that in this country, the Constitution does prevail.” Damages will be determined in a trial that will now go forward. It is likely that other landowners who did not participate in the suit will step forward to receive compensation. OLG Members: While this is good news, note that CPPR's original lawsuit filed in 1997, after 5 years of fighting the Erie county park system, took an additional 10 years to reach the Supreme Court for a decision. Our lawsuit was filed in 2004; our fight began in 1999, so that means we only have about 6 ½ more years to go. NO JOKE! Whatever the decision by Lake County Common Pleas Court Judge Lucci, the appeal process will be even more arduous than the original suit. While it may seem that Judge Lucci's decision may hand us a win, we still have a VERY long way to go. Congratulations to all our friends in CPPR, good guys can finish first if you persevere and fight till the end. Friday, November 10, 2007 - A History of the Western Reserve An interesting book entitled “The Early History of Lorain County” published in 1879 in Philadelphia by the Williams Brothers that prior OLG board member Tom Jordan found in digital form that can be accessed from the OLG website. The history extends from 1609 to 1879, the year the book was published. It is interesting in understanding how the territory known as the Western Reserve evolved, embracing the counties of Ashtabula, Trumbull, Portage, Geauga, Lake, Cuyahoga, Medina, Lorain, Huron, Erie, all of Summit except the township of Franklin, and Green; the two northern tiers of townships of Mahoning; the townships of Sullivan, Troy, and Ruggles, of Ashland; and the Islands lying north of Sandusky, including Kelly's and Put-in-Bay. The book traces the legal title of the land in the U.S. even prior to the Declaration of Independence. There were ninety-three townships, or equalized parcels drawn east of the Cuyahoga, and forty-six on the west. Congress, on the 28th of April, 1800, authorized the President to execute and deliver on the part of the United States , Letters Patent to the Governor of Connecticut, whereby the United States released for the uses named, all right and title to the soil of the Reserve, and confirmed it unto those who had purchased it from that State. The entire publication can be viewed by clicking here. Friday, November 10, 2007 - Proposed Leasing and Permitting Rules Comments Presented at Quarterly CRAC Meeting The Office of Coastal Management (OCM) compiled the work product of the 4 sessions of review by the CRAC Sub-Committee, including attachments of meeting minutes and other correspondence received by OCM. A binder containing all information was provided to CRAC members at the recent November 8th meeting held in Ashtabula. This represents many man-hours of review and consolidation of input, which resulted in 166 comments, imbedded line by line into the proposed rules. (50 comments related to definitions, 24 related to the application process, 7 related to leases, and the remaining 85 related to the permitting process.) Comments about the definitions include: • Grand fathering of current structures • Providing better clarity of definitions to remove ambiguities • Better definition of littoral rights to recognize fully those rights granted in the ORC The good news in the leasing rules as currently proposed: • Leases are required only for land beyond your deeded property • Liability insurance is no longer required for leased lands • Current lessees will receive a letter from OCM allowing them to terminate or modify their lease as it applies to their deeded property. The permitting rules as proposed are the most challenging. Key comments include: • Assure more timely decisions and ultimate approval • Differentiate between public property and private property improvements • Relax the requirements for a professional engineer, particularly on small projects or rehabilitation of structures • Establish a scale of fees for permits rather than a single $500 fee for all projects (i.e. a municipal pier or structure under the proposed rules would pay the same $500 fee as the private property owner constructing a seawall or jetty.) • Differentiate between municipal, commercial, and private structures in requirements and permit fees • Provide for full or partial refund of application fees when permit is denied or incomplete • Certain portions of the application requirements are onerous, even for a professional engineer or certified surveyor (relates to scope and size of project) • Approval requirement considerations by the ODNR Director are many, sometimes ambiguous in terms, and often not applicable to a small private property project. But they would relate to large commercial or municipal projects. This section needs clarification and relaxation for small projects. OCM Chief John Watkins stated that he and his staff plan to have completed their review of comments and produce revisions to the current proposed document in December. The revised rules will then be released for public comment. Hearing meetings are anticipated in the Sandusky area (west), Cleveland area (central) and Ashtabula area (east) after release. Comments to the proposed rules can be communicated by mail or email to the OCM. Friday, November 10. 2007 - Audubon Article – “Get Off Your Land” This is the title of a regular column called Incite by Ted Williams in the November-December issue of Audubon. Mr. Williams has written a variety of columns ranging from the Endangered Species Act to Whitetail Deer and the Golden Eagle to West Nile Virus. This month he has cast his sights on “property-rights radicals” who are chasing the public from its own beaches. He goes on to name this group, the Ohio Lakefront Group. The article goes on with interviews from the Ohio Environmental Council, the National Wildlife Federation and others. We are not only accused of “land-grabbing” but of planning to fill our beaches and build environmentally unfriendly structures that will be a detriment to lake Erie. Of most interest are quotes from State Attorney General Marc Dann who stated that the Governor's position is “inconsistent with Ohio law”. AG Dann went on to state: ‘I believe my role is to represent my institutional clients as well as the people those institutions were created to serve”. “The only person who can represent the State of Ohio is me. ODNR is a client; they changed their position against my advice. I had no alternative but to hire them outside lawyers.” AG Dann's conclusion about the lakefront property owners is: “These folks have been defrauded by someone, but it wasn't the State of Ohio. You can't give what you don't own”. The entire article can be accessed by clicking here. Friday, November 2, 2007 - CRAC Sub-Committee Minutes Posted The Rules, Laws, Consistency, Enforcement and Implementation Sub-Committee of the Coastal Resources Advisory Council (CRAC) completed its review of the ODNR proposed rules for Submerged Lands Leases and the Permitting of Coastal Structures on October 25, 2007. The minutes of all three review meetings as well as written comments and associated correspondence are posted on the Office of Coastal Management (OCM) website. To access their website, click here. Links to the proposed rules and meeting minutes are on the right side of the page. OCM Chief John Watkins and staff are working on incorporating all the oral and written comments into a single document that will then be presented to the full CRAC council on Thursday, November 8. The meeting will be held at the Ashtabula Marine Museum , 1071 Walnut Blvd in Ashtabula , beginning at 10:00 AM. This meeting is open to the public and we urge you to attend. Directions are: Drive east on I90 to exit 228 (OH 11/ OH 46). Go North towards Ashtabula for 6.2 miles. Turn left on OH 531/ E 6th Street and continue .9 miles. Turn right on Morton Drive for .1 miles and then left on Walnut Blvd. If the full Council approves the proposed rules, ODNR will continue with soliciting public comments on the rules as approved by the Coastal Resources Advisory Council. After receiving and considering public comments, the rules will be presented to Ohio 's Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review. ODNR hopes to have the final rules in place in early 2008. We are working to ensure that the final rules package respects the rights of all shoreline property owners while protecting Ohio 's valuable Lake Erie resources. If you have questions or comments about the rules, please contact the ODNR Office of Coastal Management at 419-626-7980. Friday, November 2, 2007 - Ohio Environmental Council Continues Misinformation In an article posted in the Ohio Environmental-Conservation Briefing Book, Jack Shaner continues to espouse the mistaken belief that “the public's ownership of the Lake Erie shore, up to the ordinary high water mark-is supported by State and Federal law, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, and 200 years of tradition.” This is not a true statement of fact. There is no such document giving this description or anything like it. What did happen was under the Equal Footing Act, the Federal Government gave Ohio what the Federal Government owned at the time Ohio became a State. This did not include the lands of the Western Reserve, which border Lake Erie. Prior to Ohio Statehood, the President of the United States gave what amounted to a limited warranty deed for the Western Reserve of Connecticut to the State of Connecticut as well as the investors that purchased the Western Reserve of Connecticut from the State of Connecticut in 1795. The State of Ohio has never owned the lands of the Western Reserve . Further, the public has enjoyed the use of all lakefront property owned by the State , unless however they are restricted of use by the State. Shaner refers to a “tiny group of private property owners”. This “tiny group” is more than 15,000 property owners with valid deeds to their property along the shores of Lake Erie. He uses the 11 million population of the State of Ohio along with all future generations as the unknowing losers in the battle for the rights of private property owners. Those private property rights are defined in the Constitution and in the Ohio Revised Code (ORC 1506). If one reads the entire section 1506 of the ORC they would see that the rights of the public as well as those of private property owners are equally protected under the law. Mr. Shaner has also coined a new term “common ground” as public land, which actually means the deeded land of private property owners. He writes about State and Federal Supreme Court decisions (no cites). There are no court decisions related to the lands of the Western Reserve . The article can be accessed by clicking here. The Jack Shaner article begins on page 36. You may want to e-mail Mr. Shaner to share your thoughts with him. Saturday, October, 27, 2007 - Contact List for Ohio Government and Lakeshore County Legislators We often have requests for names and contact information for the Ohio Governor's Office as well as your legislators representing the lakeshore counties. We have compiled a contact list which can be accessed by clicking here. Saturday, October 27, 2007 - One Lakeshore Property Owner's Response to OLG Lease Invoice One lakeshore owner has come up with his own idea of dealing with invoices for Submerged Lands Leases involving his own property. He is taking this action as a result of the Governor's policy stating that the State of Ohio “will honor valid deeds of local property owners along the coast of Lake Erie.” The owner believes that he has a valid deed for all or a portion of the land for which he has been making lease payments. He has written the ODNR informing them that until the State can demonstrate that his deed is invalid, he is depositing his lease payments in a separate (escrow) account in the bank. If the State can, within three years, prove his deed invalid, he will turn over appropriate funds deposited in that account. If after three years the State has not done so, he will withdraw the money and assume the matter closed. His letter copies the Governor, ODNR Director, Attorney General, OLG, and several newspapers. The letter can be viewed by clicking here. Saturday, October 27, 3007 - Sub-Committee Completes Review of Proposed New Rules* The Rules, Laws, Consistency, Enforcement and Implementation Sub-Committee of the Coastal Resources Advisory Council (CRAC) completed its review of the ODNR proposed rules for Submerged Lands Leases and the Permitting of Coastal Structures this week. OLG members Tom Jordan, Jim O'Connor, Ken Tatter and L. Scot Duncan, Kent Kemmerer, as well as members of the Ohio Environmental Council participated in these public meetings. The Sub-Committee, chaired by Dave Spotts, must be congratulated for completing this very detailed review, which included at least 100 comments and suggestions from the committee and the public. The proposed rules along with all comments incorporated into the documents will be presented to the full CRAC at their November 8th meeting in Ashtabula. Office of Coastal Management (OCM) Chief John Watkins, who conceived the idea of this first time public review of proposed rules, maintained the record of comments using a computer projector so that all could see the actual language of the input from the group. The proposed rules with comments will be posted on the ODNR Office of Coastal Management website. After the full CRAC review and their additional input, ODNR will incorporate all input as possible to provide a revised set of proposed rules. Sub-Committee Chair, Dave Spots, asked that the revised rules be presented to the sub-committee prior to going out for public comment. John Watkins agreed. The ODNR, after soliciting, receiving, and considering public comments, will present the rules to Ohio's Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review. Their review will take no more than 60 days. Then the rules are delivered to the Secretary of State and within 10 more days they will become law. At the conclusion of the rules review, Chief John Watkins addressed the group thanking everyone for their input and addressing concerns of trust with the Office of Coastal Management. He explained that he was not involved with the 1994 rules (that were surreptitiously incorporated into legislation, ed.) that gave the Office of Coastal Management broad powers of Lake Erie Coastal property to the Ordinary High Water Mark. He understands the consternation and frustration of lakeshore property owners. He further stated that he was involved with rules making in 1999 and most recently in the HB 199 appropriations bill. His role was as a writer, acting under the authority of the Director. He expected that these rules would be sent out for public comment (as had been done in his time with the Ohio EPA with new rules). He apologized saying that he at no time had an under-handed intent with rules making. This is why he personally took on this public review with CRAC and the public. He assured us that he is trying to build a cooperative process between the Office of Coastal Management and lakeshore property owners. We hope that ODNR Director Sean Logan and those who will finally implement these rules will work cooperatively and respect private property deeds, provide fair and uniform enforcement of rules, and continue to build the trust of lakeshore property owners. If you have questions or comments about the rules or the rule making processes, please contact the ODNR Office of Coastal Management at 419-626-7980. To access their website, click here . Saturday, October 20. 2007 - Lease Holders Must Still Pay Leases Last week we reported on the letter from ODNR Director Sean Logan advising leaseholders that certain leases may be eliminated or modified in the future. This was as a result of Governor Strickland's order to respect the deeds of private property owners. However, lease invoices continue to be sent out from the Office of Coastal. Management. I contacted their office and spoke with Chief, John Watkins. The following are points from our conversation: • Until the Rules changes are in effect, which would allow the elimination or modification of leases, the Office of Coastal Management is obliged to continue to collect lease rent. • The lease between the State and the individual leaseholder is a legal obligation that cannot be changed or broken without the consent of both parties. Until the rules are changed, these lease agreements must be honored. • The monies collected from these leases are part of the State's budget for receiving matching dollars from the federal government and must be collected in order not to forfeit those funds. In addition, 50% of the funds collected go back to the municipalities where the leaseholders reside. These municipalities are also dependant on receiving these funds for their budgets. The bottom line is that you are expected to pay your lease rental when it is due, and until the rules are changed to allow modifications or elimination of the leases. It is important to note that submerged lands leases that extend beyond your deeded property line are still subject to lease payments. This would include groins, docks, and other structures built out into the lake that extends beyond your deeded property. Saturday, October 13, 2007 - ODNR Proposed Rules The ODNR website has the new proposed rules for leases and permits. The preamble to the rules includes the statement by Governor Ted Strickland, which directs the ODNR to respect the valid deeds of shoreline property owners. However, the permitting process as currently proposed seems onerous. The seven-step procedure with 6 sub-requirements involves an extraordinary effort that will surely require the services of a professional engineer. For example, the first requirement includes, in addition to deed records and a map showing the location of the proposed structure with respect to county, township, and municipal boundaries and state, county and local reads: “Detailed plans and specifications, including supporting calculations, analyses, studies and other information used by the professional engineer or applicant in designing the structure. The engineering methods and design conditions (wave height, wind direction, water level, water depth, etc) used in designing the structure shall also be specified. Design methodologies and procedures that have been established by the United Stated Army Corps of Engineers, the American Society of Civil Engineers and others that are recognized as valid coastal engineering practices will generally be acceptable.” There are six sub-sections to this requirement, which are too lengthy to report here. The Director's review may include: • Potential impact upon air and water quality; • Likelihood that the development… may affect historic, cultural, or aesthetic resources; • Floral and faunal communities.; • Potential impact upon wetlands or other state resource waters; • Potential impact upon littoral zone including sand transport; • Plus 16 additional review items This is not a procedure that can be completed by an applicant without the considerable services of a professional engineer. This professional engineer' fee, along with the non-refundable application fee constitutes a significant expenditure prior to actual construction expenses. To read the entire proposed rules, click here to access the ODNR website. Read down to Draft Rules and then click September 29, 2007 . Friday. October 12, 2007 - CRAC Seeking New Members The Coastal Resources Advisory Council has 9 seats to be filled for the next four-year term beginning February 2008. We are asking our members to consider applying for an appointment to provide shoreline owners with better representation and to voice our concerns. Applications are available from our website and can be downloaded by clicking here. OR contact the ODNR Office of Coastal Management at 419-626-7980. Applications sent to the Office of Coastal Management must be postmarked by November 1. Thursday, August 8, 2007 - CRAC Council Meeting We previously reported some erroneous information about the August 8th meeting on Kelleys Island that 12 OLG members attended. We erroneously reported that CRAC members were made up of many ODNR employees. This is not true. The members come from diverse areas of business, education, and government. The complete list of CRAC members, along with a brief bio can be found at the Office of Coastal Management web site by clicking here. These bios indicate that some of the CRAC members work for a governmental entity or are involved with some conservation organization—hence the misunderstanding about their ODNR affiliation. Department of Natural Resources Director Sean Logan and Office of Coastal Management Chief John Watkins attended the meeting. Both Director Logan and Chief Watkins spoke about the Governor's New Regulatory Policy Regarding Coastal Land Management. A portion of the policy states: “The Governor and ODNR recognize that there are arguable legal claims that some of the deeds have specific defects and that deeds purporting to cover lands below the OHWM may ultimately be found by the Ohio courts to be subordinate to the public's interest in those lands. Still, without such a determination by the Ohio courts, ODNR believes that it must honor those deeds. The Governor and ODNR also recognize that they have a solemn duty to manage coastal lands in a manner that protects the important resource that Lake Erie represents. In that regard, ODNR has begun the planning necessary to implement the following new regulatory policies: Property owners who wish to build structures along the shores of Lake Erie that could or would impact coastal lands will no longer be required to obtain leases for the lands within their deeds which are beneath such structures, but will be obligated to obtain appropriate permits from ODNR's Office of Coastal Management before commencing any such construction.” Both Director Logan and Chief Watkins spoke of their planned efforts to revise the ODNR Administrative Code to comply with the Governor's policy. This was very heartening and seemed to pave the way for the resolution to be introduced by O'Connor. The last item on the agenda was the resolution, which Jim O'Connor introduced with a preliminary overview of the formation and struggle of OLG against the State. The resolution as read: “BE IT RESOLVED THAT: The Coastal Resources Advisory Council recommends that ODNR and the Office of Coastal Management immediately and appropriately notify all residents that have Lake Erie submerged lands leases with the State. The notification should state that, to the extent covered by private deeds, the State will immediately waive the requirement in the lease for the payment of fees pursuant to the Governor's July 13, 2007, announcement. The Coastal Resources Advisory Council further recommends that that ODNR and the Office of Coastal Management convert all leases of privately deeded property to permits within six (6) months.” O'Connor's motion for the Council to accept the resolution was NOT seconded by any CRAC member. Therefore by Roberts Rules there could be no further discussion. Despite the lack of a second, Council Chair, James Kastelic, allowed further discussion, which included comments by Director Logan and Chief Watkins. The Council Chair further asked that the resolution be sent to the Rules, Laws, Consistency, Enforcement and Implementation Committee for review prior to asking for a vote of the entire Council. He also asked Jim O'Connor if he would join that committee for this review, to which Jim agreed. The agenda for the meeting, in fact, had shown that the motion would be forwarded to committee. During the public comment portion of the meeting, the CRAC members were attentive and responsive to points made by those in attendance. We believe this shows correctly what occurred in the meeting and that the review committee will look carefully at the Governor's policy and find the resolution consistent with that policy. Saturday, August 4, 2007 - Coastal Resources Advisory Council (CRAC) Meeting The Coastal Resources Advisory Council is a group comprised of people appointed by the State to advise ODNR on issues relating to Lake Erie. One of our members, Jim O'Connor, is a member of the CRAC. At a meeting to be held on Thursday, August 9, 2007, Jim will introduce a resolution drafted by OLG to ask ODNR to discontinue charging lease fees on private property and to eliminate these leases. There will be time for comments from the public after the resolution is introduced. The agenda for the meeting can be viewed by clicking here. The Governor's new policy for ODNR in response to his pledge to "honor our deeds" in the CRAC Update can be viewed by clicking here. There is a full chronology of all of the newspaper articles since Governor Strickland's announcement as well as some interesting comments made by Strickland and AG Dann after the announcement. To read these, click here. Monday, July 30, 2007 - Final Briefs Filed in Lawsuit All parties filed Reply Briefs this week as the final round of motions and briefs to go before the Court. While the OLG's 36-page and the State's 64-page final Reply Briefs are much too complex to explain in a few words, I believe they can be summarized as follows: OLG presents law and case evidence at the federal and state level that completely refutes any of the misinterpretations of the State's position of ownership to the Ordinary High Water Mark. OLG further defines the State's boundary at the low water mark. The State continues to use the same misinterpretation of law and case evidence to argue the State's ownership of the dry land up to the Ordinary High Water Mark, including filled land. In the OLG Proposed Order, we ask the Court conclude that the furthest landward boundary of the “territory” is the low water mark of Lake Erie. We further ask that Class Members enjoy unique rights, known as “littoral rights”, and that the general public does not enjoy these rights. Further, Class Members are entitled, through the right of accretion, to ownership of new lands adjoining their property formed by the natural deposit of soil above the low water mark. And, Class Members retain ownership of lands lost suddenly and perceptively to Lake Erie and are entitled to reclaim such lost lands by artificial fill. In the State's inferred proposed order, it asks that the Court find that the State has ownership of the Public Trust property up to the Ordinary High Water Mark, specifically 573.4 feet, and that the public has the rights to the use of that land. To read the OLG Reply Brief, click here. To read the OLG Proposed Motion (for the Court) click here. To read the State's Reply Brief, click here. Thursday, June 21, 2007 - OLG Press Conference Condemns "Takings" The Ohio Lakefront Group and Senator Grendell held a press conference at the Capitol to express dismay at the recent actions of ODNR and to introduce a new Senate Bill. In response to ODNR's recent proposal to take deeded land from several property owners and give the land to another, Tony Yankel, President of OLG, said. "...ODNR has taken this stealing of private property to new heights. ODNR is not only claiming private property as public, but it is now considering 'leasing' it to a third party." The proposal is to take property away from three landowners so that a fourth landowner, who has no access to the Bay, will obtain 55 feet of frontage. "There has been a national outcry against government using eminent domain...taking property from one person and giving it to another...This is a least as outrageous...owners are not even offered any compensation...it is simply stolen," said Yankel. "When is Governor Strickland going to put an end to this madness?" To view the new "land grab" click here. Thursday, June 21, 2007 - Senator Grendell Introduces SB 189 Senator Tim Grendell introduced a new bill for the Ohio Lakefront Group, SB 189. The co-sponsors include Senators Robert Spada, Randy Gardner, Larry Mumper, Gary Cates and Tim Schaffer. This Bill protects the deeds of shoreline private property owners from illegal takings by the State and restores littoral rights to these owners. Some of the key items: 1) ..."ordinary high water mark" refers to the level established by the US Army Corps of Engineers for regulatory purposes and shall not be construed to determine property boundaries. 2) If a littoral owner wishes to restore lost lands, ODNR shall bear the burden of proving that the lands were submerged as a result of natural erosion rather than avulsion or artificially induced erosion. One of the "littoral rights" listed in the Revised Code 1506.01 states that "with respect to lands lost by avulsion" (a sudden loss of land by the action of water or other natural causes) "or artificially induced erosion," you have the right "to restore the lands out to the natural shoreline (the line at which the water usually stands when free from disturbing causes) as it existed at the time of the loss." In addition, the Bill transfers significant management responsibilities from the Director of ODNR to the Governor and moves major decisions from the Chief of the Office of Coastal Management to the Director. The Office of Coastal Management would have administrative responsibilities only. Friday, June 1, 2007 - OLG Files Motion for Summary Judgment On May 30, 2007, OLG filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in Lake County Court of Common Pleas. In essence, this Motion sets forth all the facts from our plaintiff perspective and asks that Judge Lucci issue a ruling in our favor, specifically that our deeds determine the boundaries of our private property. This 36-page motion plus numerous addendums is a lot to absorb, but the key points are: • Ohio Courts consistently have limited the Public Trust Rights to the “Waters” of Lake Erie . • The State has made several attempts in the last 40 years to redefine the Public Trust boundary. • Ohio Statutes identifies the landward boundary as the “Natural Shoreline.” • According to common and technical usages and the Ohio Supreme Court, the Natural Shoreline” is the Low Water Mark. • Use of the Ordinary High Water Mark as the Public Trust boundary conflicts with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources' own rules as well as earlier Ohio Supreme Court decisions. • Use of the Ordinary High Water Mark would violate property rights to the shore as supported by case law. • The rights of the public are expressly limited to navigation, fishery, and water commerce, per Ohio Revised Code. • Littoral property owners enjoy all the rights of the public on the waters of Lake Erie , plus additional rights of access, the right to lands gained through accretion and reliction, the right to maintain ownership and to reclaim avulsed property and the right to exclude others from using their shores. The conclusion is: “The boundary of the Public Trust is set by statute at the “natural shoreline.” The “natural shoreline” has been interpreted, and should be interpreted here, to be the low water mark or water's edge, as it exists at any point in time. The ordinary high water mark, both in the abstract and as applied here, violates common and legal understandings of the “shoreline” and undermines property rights long-recognized in this state. The public has rights to the water, but none to the private land, even private shores. For all these reasons, the Court should grant plaintiffs motion for summary judgment….” Click here to view the full motion. Friday, June 1, 2007 - State Files Motion for Summary Judgment On May 30, 2007, the State filed their 66 page Motion for Summary Judgment. The state's motion continues the mantra of owning to the OHWM since statehood. In their summary argument they say: “The ‘territory', consisting of the navigable waters of Lake Erie within Ohio 's territorial boundaries, the lands beneath those waters, and their contents, was vested in the State of Ohio pursuant to the Equal Footing Doctrine of the U.S. Constitution, upon the admission of Ohio into the Union in 1803. The landward terminus of the territory is a question of federal law: the well established answer to which is the Ordinary High Water Mark.” The State continues to make up the concept that there was an OHWM in 1803 and that it has owned the land since statehood. If you read the actual ORC it still says: “ It is hereby declared that the waters of Lake Erie consisting of the territory within the boundaries of the state, extending from the southerly shore of Lake Erie to the international boundary line between the United States and Canada, together with the soil beneath and their contents, do now belong and have always, since the organization of the State of Ohio, belonged to the State as proprietor in trust for the people of the state……. subject to ... the property rights of littoral owners …including the right to make reasonable use of waters in front of or flowing past their lands...” The entire Motion consists of the State's own spin which it has used to confuse the public and get the environmentalists on their side, and with which it hopes to win this lawsuit. Click here to read the full motion. Friday, April 27, 2007 - OLG President Tony Yankel letter to Governor Strickland In a letter to Governor Ted Strickland, Tony reiterated Governor Strickland's pre-election statement supporting OLG. It stated: “ I have concluded that the lakefront owners rightfully own the land as specified in their deeds. Our country was founded on a profound respect for private property rights, and a Strickland/Fisher Administration will ensure the State of Ohio continues to value the rights of property owners. While there is a necessary balance between the public's use of the waters of Lake Erie that is protected by the public trust and private property rights, we believe the State of Ohio has gone too far and is unjustified in its attempt to take this land from those who rightly own it.” Tony went on to say that while we understand that a transition period is necessary, we have yet to see any changes in the actions of ODNR, nor by the Attorney General regarding our pending class action lawsuit. Tony has invited Governor Strickland to our Annual Meeting to directly address his specific plans to resolve our issues. To read Tony's entire letter, click this link . Monday, April 23, 2007 - Governor's Promise to Lakefront owners On Monday, April 23, the Sandusky Register ran an article: “Lakefront group to governor: Match words with deeds” written by Tom Jackson. The article reiterated the governor's written statement to the Lakefront group prior to last year's gubernatorial election: "I have concluded that the lakefront owners rightfully own the land as specified in their deeds," the governor said when he was the Democratic nominee. "Our country was founded on a profound respect for private property rights, and a Strickland/Fisher administration will ensure the state of Ohio continues to value the rights of property owners." State Senator Tim Grendell was quoted as saying he is “disappointed” with the lack of progress after meeting over the past months with Strickland Administration officials. Keith Dailey, speaking for the governor, is quoted as saying, "The governor and his staff are engaged in ongoing discussions. The governor is looking for someway to bring both sides together and bring them to an agreement." OLG President, Tony Yankel, who was interviewed by phone, said that OLG has had little success in trying to meet with the Governor Strickland and Lt. Governor Lee Fisher. Tony is quoted saying, “ At this point we're getting a little antsy," and noted that it's nearing time for the state to file replies in our ongoing lawsuit against ODNR. The Register reported that “ Last year, Fisher affirmed the ticket's support for the Ohio Lakefront Group while he campaigned in Erie County and noted the position echoes a legal opinion Fisher wrote as attorney general. Fisher said he and Strickland believe it's wrong “for the state to be infringing on the private property rights of landowners along the lake.”” To read the full article in the Sandusky Register, click this link. Friday, March 2, 2007 - Judge Lucci Conducts Lawsuit Conference On Wednesday, February 28, 2007, Judge Lucci conducted a conference by telephone with legal counsel for all parties of the lawsuit and with legal counsel for class members opposing inclusion in the class; i.e. the City of Cleveland and two individuals. Judge Lucci did not grant the motions filed by the individuals and the City of Cleveland to opt out. He asked that these parties continue to participate in the proceedings to assist the court with issues as they arise. Judge Lucci advised counsel for the State of Ohio to review the State's current position with Governor Strickland and Attorney General Dann to determine whether the new administration would adopt a policy change. The two intervening defendants, the National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council, indicated that they would fight on if the state adopted the plaintiffs' (OLG) position. All parties generally discussed types of evidence they believed would be used to support their respective positions when filing summary judgment motions. Among other things, ODNR's legal counsel stated that the State's public trust is not a question of legal title but a question of rights of use. Judge Lucci did not issue a schedule for the case. Instead, he instructed all parties to discuss a schedule, including deadlines for discovery and filing summary judgment motions, and to jointly present a schedule to him by the end of next week.With regard to pending motions, Judge Lucci stated that he was granting our motion to allow Tim and Kim Rosenberg and Steve Nickel to withdraw as class representatives. Mr. Nickel will remain as a class member. Friday, March 2, 2007 - OLG Files Motions on Lawsuit On February 15, 2007, OLG filed three motions with the Court: The first was the reply to the National Wildlife Federation and Ohio Environmental Council' Motion to intervene in the lawsuit. In essence, the reply stated that these parties lacked sufficient knowledge or information to support the allegations set forth in their motion. Further, the reply stated that the parties formed legal conclusions for which no response is required. Lastly, the reply denied allegations as contrary to Ohio law. This Reply can be viewed by clicking here. The second was the Proof of Publication confirming to the Court that legal notices to Class Members were published as directed by the Court. This notice can be viewed by clicking here. The third was a Motion to the Court to permit withdrawal of two named plaintiffs from the lawsuit. They are three of twelve class members named in the original lawsuit. Two of the original plaintiffs have moved from the State of Ohio and no longer own lakefront property; the third still lives in Ohio but requested to be removed as a plaintiff for personal reasons. the notice can be viewed by clicking here. Friday, February 23, 2007 - Senator Grendell New Bill for 127th General Assembly Senator Tim Grendell continues to work on behalf of Ohio Lakefront Group to reintroduce a Bill for this legislative session. He has made a few minor improvements to the Bill (compared to SB 127) that will simply help to clarify our position. This new bill is necessary for the new legislative session, the 127 th Ohio General Assembly which began this year. All bills that were introduced during the past 2-year legislative session died must be introduced and start all over again in the new General Assembly. This new bill is expected to be introduced as soon as we have co-sponsors. State Senator Randy Gardner has advised Senator Grendell's office that he will be a co-sponsor for the bill. We expect to have similar legislation introduced into the House of Representatives. Wednesday, February 9 ,2007 - City of Cleveland Opts Out of Class Action Lawsuit As of the deadline of February 9, 2007 set by Lake County Common Pleas Court Judge Lucci, the city of Cleveland formally opted out of the Class in our lawsuit against ODNR. The City of Cleveland stated in its filing with the Court that it “wishes to support the State of Ohio 's position on lakeshore ownership”. It further stated that “The City believes that public access to Lake Erie should be maintained and not diminished. City of Cleveland can be commended on its lakefront parks and other public works along the Lake Erie Shoreline. However, it too bad that the City did not seem to understand that by opting out of the lawsuit it was not supporting its own lakeshore private property owners. To view the City's motion, click here. Friday, January 26, 2007 -Last of Legal Ads Run in Area Newspapers (see article below) The last of three weeks of the Class Suit Notification which began on January 12th ran today. It reads: "ATTENTION: LAKE SHORE LAND OWNERS Check the legal classified ad in this newspaper for important class action legal notice" The actual legal notice is quite lengthy, but can be read by clicking here. There have been questions regarding the wording of the actual Legal Notice. An explanation of the notice can be read by clicking here to read the January 27th e-News. Wednesday, January 3, 2007 - Amended Order for Notification of Class Members This week Judge Lucci responded to our motion to amend his order for Class Notification by allowing us to advertise in newspapers of general circulation in counties that abut the shore of Lake Erie in Ohio . The Notice as set forth by Judge Lucci will appear once each week for three consecutive weeks on the same day of each week in the “legal classified” section of the following newspapers: The Toledo Blade , The News Herald ( Ottawa County ), The Sandusky Register , The Chronicle Telegram , The Plain Dealer , The News-Herald ( Lake County ), and The Star Beacon. In addition, a two column wide and one inch high ad will appear simultaneously in the news section of each newspaper.The ad will refer lakeshore land owners to the legal classified section to read the full class action notice. The first publication of this Legal Notice must occur not later than January 20, 2007. OLG is currently preparing to follow this order as issued. We expect the cost to be between $5000 and $6000. This represents a significant reduction in cost from the original order which we had quoted at $47,706. To read the entire order from Judge Lucci, click here. Wednesday, January 3, 2007 - Strickland Names new Director for ODNR Pending approval by the Ohio Senate, former State Representative Sean Logan will take over as director of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, replacing Sam Speck. Logan would step down as president of the Columbiana County Board of Commissioners. Along with serving as president of the county Board of Commissioners, he also is a member of the Little Beaver Creek Wild and Scenic River Advisory Board. Mr. Logan served for six years on the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee during his 10-year tenure that ended in 2000 due to term limits. Mr. Logan said: "From camping and hiking to hunting and fishing, our state parks and bountiful natural resources are a vast source of recreation - and economic strength - for our great state, I look forward to ensuring that Ohio's natural heritage will be enjoyed by Ohioans for generations to come." Ohio Environmental Council Public Affairs Director Jack Shaner said the governor-elect's choice is familiar with the agency's services and needs given that he hails from a county full of ODNR facilities. Mr Shaner added that control of the Lake Erie shoreline and the related issue of the ‘public trust' has been a lightning rod for controversy and extensive legislative debate in recent years. Mr. Shaner said his group would be watching to assure Governor-elect Strickland continues to maintain Ohio 's 200-year history of protecting the Lake Erie shoreline. Friday, December 29th, 2006 - Great Lakes Compact News Ratification of the Great Lakes Compact has appeared in many newspapers across the Great Lakes States, some pro, some questioning. On December 19th the Akron Beacon Journal wrote a particularly biased article against Senator Tim Grendell's opposition to the “Compact” in the Ohio Senate, where it was still in committee. While it was obvious that the writer had no clue as to the implications of the legislative language that would enact the “Compact”, it extolled Governor Taft and the Ohio House for bringing improved stewardship to the region's most treasured natural resource. To read the full article, click here. To the Akron Beacon Journal's credit, they published a rebuttal by Senator Grendell in which he stated “I support the main purpose of the Great Lakes Compact. Preventing extraterritorial diversion of water is good. But the Compact goes far beyond that.” He further stated that the Great Lakes are not under immediate threat as there is a 1986 federal law prohibiting out-of-basin transfers of water without approval from all of the governors of the Great Lakes states. No other state is approving the Compact. The other states are not hesitating because they are waiting for Ohio to show "leadership.'' They, too, have concerns with the Compact as currently written. He wrote, “Ten years ago, lakefront property owners expressed concerns with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources' Coastal Management Plan, citing the potential impact its language on the public trust could have on their private-property rights. Those concerns were disregarded at the time, labeled ``exaggerated''. Today, those same landowners are in the middle of an exhausting and expensive legal battle to defend their private-property rights.” He concluded “We should enact a Compact that prevents water diversion, but only if it does not infringe on Ohioans' private-property rights or make Ohio less competitive for economic development. We owe that to Ohioans, especially since there was no reason to pass it in a rush of hasty meetings during the last weeks of session.” To read the entire article click here. Thursday, December 13, 2006 - OLG Asks Judge for Notification Change As reported on November 14, Judge Lucci ordered that OLG take advertisements in 11 newspapers to run for 3 consecutive weeks beginning no later than December 23rd to notify all potential class members of the lawsuit. OLG has determined the cost of such publication would be $47,706, a truly prohibitive cost for our group. Our motion for consideration notes that our class will receive no monetary gain from this lawsuit and that all funding for the lawsuit has been from voluntary contributions from OLG members. Our motion requests that Judge Lucci allow us to advertise in the legal classified section of only the seven newspapers distributed along Lake Erie and eliminate advertising in the large State newspapers in Akron, Columbus, and Cincinnati. This would reduce our cost to $3200. The motion also points out that there have been ample news publications in all the newspapers in Ohio since the class was certified by the judge. Many of these articles were attached as exhibits to our motion. It is more likely that these stories have been read by class members, than the proposed advertisement as originally specified by the Judge. We are hopeful that Judge Lucci will honor our motion. To read the full motion, click here. Wednesday, December 13, 2006 - House Passes Great Lakes Compact by 82/5 vote The full session of the house Wednesday passed the Compact by an overwhelming majority. Despite the lopsided House victory, Senator Tim Grendell (R., Chesterland) predicted the bill would not make it out of the Senate before lawmakers bring the two-year session to an end next week. "I believe the majority of the senators believe we have to address the issues I've raised with this compact, that have been raised by the Wisconsin Senate, the New York House, and the Indiana legislature," he said. (None of these states are anywhere near ready to ratify this Compact.) Senator Grendell argues that a provision declaring the waters of the five Great Lakes to be "part of the public trust" would convert existing private property rights to the public domain. He also contends federal law already prohibits water diversion. But Senator's Grendell, Seitz, and others worry that the language of Dolan's bill could have sweeping legal consequences for groundwater management, property rights along Lake Erie, and the potential impact on water consumption in the state. Under the Compact, the State gives up its sovereign rights of governance over the entire area specified in the Compact and the Compact governing group would be immune from all law suits or legal action by individuals or states. Senate spokeswoman Maggie Ostrowski said Thursday that President Bill Harris has sent the Senate Bill (319) to the Rules Committee where unwanted bills sometimes die. The Senate anticipates adjourning the two-year session as early as next week, and Taft leaves office in January due to term limits. Wednesday, December 6, 2006 - Senate Bill 319, Hearing on Great Lakes Compact Senate Bill S.B. 319 in committee hearing today threatens the private property rights of every citizen in the State of Ohio . Ratification of the Great Lakes Compact (the subject of this bill) eliminates private property rights and State sovereignty as we know it today. Tony Yankel gave opponent testimony which argued against the broad reach of the Compact and chided ODNR for trying to ram through this legislation in the lame duck session of the General Assembly. He urged that the Senate committee defer hearings on the bill until next year when the new governor and newly elected General Assembly is in session. His testimony seemed to be well received. To read the press release, click here.To read Tony Yankel's opponent testimony, click here. Specifically the Great Lakes Compact if ratified by the General Assembly would: • Create public trust of all privately owned lakes, ponds, farm irrigation, drainage ditches, well water, and (potentially) wetlands in the Lake Erie watershed. This is a major change in property law in Ohio and an unprecedented taking of private property. • The budget and budget control would be set solely by the Great Lakes Compact authority and funded by assessment of the State(s). The State would have no control of the budget, nor expenditures, thus requiring Ohio taxpayers to foot the bill for a completely unaccountable organization. • There is lack of public records requirement in SB 319 language which only permits inspection of meeting minutes “at its offices during regular business hours”. This gives no consideration to those who cannot inspect the records in-office. • While jurisdiction is stated to be “within the limits of the Basin,” the council is given discretion to act outside of the Basin should it be “necessary or convenient” to discharge its powers and responsibilities. This extremely over-reaching policy opens up the entire State of Ohio to the Compact authority. • Great Lakes Compact council, members, and personnel have immunity from suit and “ every form of Judicial Process ”. In other words, there is no recourse possible for any action taken by the council. • If Ohio ratifies the Great Lakes Compact, the state of Ohio is forever bound by its policies. It is not possible to ever withdraw from the Compact, once the state has ratified the agreement. In other words, the State of Ohio and the people of Ohio are forever subject to the unaccountable policies of the Compact. To read the entire Senate Bill 319, click here. Friday, November 24, 2006 - Judge Orders Notification of Potential Members of Class A In a revised order, Judge Lucci specified the method of notification to be by Newspaper advertisement. The notification will be advertised in 11 newspapers. They specifically are: The Toledo Blade, The News Herald (Ottawa County), The Sandusky Register, The Chronicle Telegram , The Plain Dealer , The News-Herald (Lake County), The Star Beacon, The Columbus Dispatch , The Cincinnati Enquirer , The Akron Beacon Journal , and The Vindicator. The first publication of this Notice will occur not later than December 23, 2006 and run for three weeks of publication in each of the foregoing newspapers. In addition, the Notice will be sent by the court to, and until February 9, 2007, it shall be displayed conspicuously in, the Clerk of Courts' Office and the County Recorder's Office in every county that abuts the shore of Lake Erie in Ohio: Lucas County, Sandusky County, Ottawa County, Erie County, Lorain County, Cuyahoga County, Lake County, and Ashtabula County. The court established February 9, 2007, as the last day for any class member or potential class member to signify that they consider the class representation unfair and/or inadequate. To read the entire order, click here. Past Issues OLG e-News May 31, 2009 October 4. 2008 September 20. 2008 September 13, 2008 September 6, 2008 August 30, 2008 August 23, 2008 August 16, 2008 August 9, 2008 August 2, 2008 July 26, 3008 July 19, 2008 July 5, 2008 May 31, 2008 May 24, 2008 May 17, 2008 May 10, 2008 May 3, 2008 April 26th, 2006 April 12, 2008 April 5, 2008 March 29,2008 March 15, 2008March 1, 2008 February 23, 2008 February 16, 2008 February 9, 2008 February 2, 2008 January 26,2008 January 12, 2008 January 5, 2008 Page updated 05/31/2009 - K. Kemmerer Copyright 2009, Ohio Lakefront Group
	Home

	Our Mission

	What You Can Do

	News & Events

	- 2003 Archives
	- 2002 Archives

	- 2001 Archives

	Links

	Contribute Now

Site design courtesy of: Randy M. Pindor www.art-department.com


		Contact Us \| Become a Member \| FAQ's

		Home -> News & Events -> Current News & Events

2008-09 News & Events