In the case of Cleveland v. State, Slip Opinion No. 2019-Ohio-3820, the Ohio Supreme Court held that public authorities cannot impose residency requirements when contracting for public construction projects.
In this case, the Ohio General Assembly enacted R.C. 9.75, barring any public authority from imposing residency requirements for public construction contracts — i.e., requiring a construction contractor to hire local residents. A city brought legal action to prevent enforcement of the statute arguing that the statute improperly limits local self-government.
The Ohio Supreme Court held that the Ohio Constitution gives authority to the Ohio General Assembly to enact statutes promoting the general welfare of employees. The Ohio Supreme Court found that the intent of the present statute was to promote the general welfare of employees and, thus, held that the Ohio General Assembly could restrict public authorities including municipalities from imposing residency requirements for public construction contracts.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is always changing like the Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.