IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

SUMMIT COUNTY, OHIO

STATE OF OHIO EX REL.
MARCELLA GAYDOSH
9250 Liberty Road
Twinsburg, OH 44087

)
)
)

CASE NO:

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

JUDGE:

)
Relator,

vs.
CITY OF TWINSBURG
C/O MAYOR KATHERINE PROCOP
AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
WILLIAM FUREY
WILLIAM HON
JOANNE KARABEC-STUDER
ROBERT MCDERMOTT
STEVE MURPHY
ANDREW ROMITO
SAM SCAFFIDE
10075 Ravenna Road
Twinsburg, OH 44087
)

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF
AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

)
Respondents.
)
____________________________________)
Now comes Relator Marcella Gaydosh, pursuant to R.C. 733.59 and R.C.
2721, by and through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to the Courts Order
granting her leave to file this document, who submits to this Court her First Amended
Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and for Injunctive relief as follows:
1. Relator is a City of Twinsburg resident and taxpayer.
2. Respondent, City of Twinsburg, is a chartered municipal corporation
situated in Summit County, Ohio.

3. Pursuant to R.C. 2721.12, Attorney General Betty Montgomery will be

served with a copy of this action.
4. On April 9, 2004, the Ninth District Court of Appeals, in Case Number
21238, issued a Writ of Mandamus, to compel the City of Twinsburg to
correct its Official Zoning Map to reflect that the property annexed by
City Ordinance 38-2002 is subject to Twinsburg Township Industrial
zoning.
5. In its effort to comply with the Writ, the City marked the parcel at issue
here with dashes on the Official Zoning Map. Ex. A.
6. The City also printed a note on the Map which stated that this parcel is:
Annexed property at Chamberlin Road and SR 82. Zoned Heavy
Industrial District (I-2) in accordance with Chapter 15 of the Zoning
Resolution of Twinsburg Township, Ohio effective February, 2001. Id.
7. Despite the appearance of compliance with the Writ, the City took
additional illegal action when it passed Ordinance 76-2004. Ordinance
76-2004 usurps Twinsburg Townships authority to enforce its own Zoning
Resolution by purporting to adopt the Twinsburg Township Zoning
Classification for the parcel. Ex. B.
8. However, the City claims that it, not the Township, is assuming all
responsibility for and all authority over the administration of zoning
regulations applicable to that parcel of land . Id., Sec. III.
9. This action violates the plain language of R.C. 519 et seq. which
establishes Township authority to zone property.

10. R.C. 519.18 which governs township authority within municipal

boundaries states that:
Regulations enacted by a board of township trustees under sections 519.02 to 519.25,
inclusive, of the Revised Code, shall not apply within municipal corporations, except
that where township territory, subject to such regulations, is incorporated, such
regulations shall apply therein and be enforced by the township officials until the
election and qualification of the officers for the newly incorporated territory, and for
not to exceed ninety days thereafter, to enable the officers of the newly incorporated
territory to adopt zoning regulations. Upon annexation of township territory to an
existing municipal corporation the zoning regulations then in effect shall remain in
full force and shall be enforced by the township officials until the legislative
authority of said municipal corporation shall either officially adopt the existing
zoning regulations or new regulations for such territory.
11. Pursuant to Ordinance 76-2004, the City of Twinsburgs adoption of
Twinsburg Township zoning regulations is a zoning change which
violates the City of Twinsburg Charter unless it complies with City of
Twinsburg Charter 7A.01.
12. As City officials well know, Charter 7A.01 mandates that:
Any change in zoning classifications or districts, or in the uses permitted in any
zoning use classifications or districts within the City of Twinsburg, must first be
submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration and report. In the event the
City Council should approve any of the preceding requested changes, . . . it shall not
be effective, but it shall be mandatory that the same be approved by the majority
vote of all votes cast of the qualified electors of the City of Twinsburg and of each
ward in which the property so changed is located at the next scheduled election.
13. Furthermore, Section 1139.02 of the City of Twinsburg Zoning Code
provides that:
Provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to all structures and land of any political
subdivision, district, taxing unit or bond-issuing authority located within the
corporate limits of the City to the extent allowed by law. All public officials of the
City, vested with the duty and authority to issue legal documents, shall not issue
permits or certificate for any structure that would result in conflict with this
Ordinance. However, should such a permit or certificates be issued and be in
conflict with this Ordinance, it shall be deemed null and void.

14. Additionally, R.C. 709.10 read in conjunction with the Twinsburg City
Charter 7A.01 and 1989 Zoning Code 1139.02 requires the City of
Twinsburgs citizens to vote to finalize any annexation.
15. The Revised Code states as follows:
R.C. 709.10. Effective date and rights of inhabitants
The annexation shall become effective thirty days after the passage of the resolution
or ordinance by the legislative authority of the municipal corporation accepting
annexation, provided that if the resolution or ordinance is subjected to a referendum,
the annexation, if approved by the electors, shall become effective thirty days after
such approval.
16. The voters have reserved to themselves specific legislative authority to
zone land and establish the boundaries of the City.
17. No referendum votes have been held on the following properties:
a. Ordinance 09-92 (Commerce Park),
b. Ordinance 84-92 (Old Mill/Route 91),
c. Ordinance 114-92 (Steffans property),
d. Ordinance 138-97 (Abrams property),
e. Ordinance 26-2002 (Sheller property),
f. Ordinance 38-2002 (Chamberlin Road) purportedly zoned by
Ordinance 76-2004.
18. Simply put, the City of Twinsburg is not empowered to enforce zoning
regulations in these parcels because these parcels have not been annexed
to the City of Twinsburg. Therefore it is an abuse of the City of
Twinsburgs corporate powers and a misapplication of its funds for the
City to enforce its Ordinances as related to these parcels.

19. The Citys continued assertion of authority over these and like parcels is in
violation of the Charter and Ordinances of the City of Twinsburg and the
Ohio Revised Code.
20. Relator Gaydosh has notified the City of Twinsburg Law Director of these
violations upon which he has refused to act. Ex.s C through E
respectively.
WHEREFORE, Relator Marcella Gaydosh respectfully requests that this Court
stop the City of Twinsburgs unlawful assumption of power and expenditure of funds by
declaring Ordinance 76-2004, Ordinance 09-92, Ordinance 84-92, Ordinance 114-92,
Ordinance 138-97, and Ordinance 26-2002 invalid and by enjoining City of Twinsburg
officials from acting in their official capacity in any way upon the above listed parcels
and any other parcels which have not been presented to the voters for confirmation of
annexation. Relator Gaydosh also asks this Court to grant payment of attorney's fees if
this Court rules in her favor and such other relief as the Court may deem proper.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Warner Mendenhall 0070165
Jacquenette S. Corgan 0072778
190 N. Union St., Suite 201
Akron, Ohio 44304
v330.535.9160
f330.762.9743
warnermendenhall@hotmail.com
j.corgan@justice.com
COUNSEL FOR RELATOR

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A copy of the foregoing was served via regular U.S. Mail on ______ November,
2006, upon the following:

Clair Dickinson and Amanda Leffler, Esq., Brouse McDowall, 388 S. Main St.,
Suite 500, Akron, Ohio 44311;
Charles Webster, Law Director, City of Twinsburg, 10075 Ravenna Road,
Twinsburg, Ohio, 44087; and
Alfred E. Schrader, Esq., 441 Wolf Ledges Parkway, Suite 400, P.O. Box 0079,
Akron, Ohio, 44309-0079.

________________________________
One of the Attorneys for Relator