Fired Akron officer takes residency c...

Fired Akron officer takes residency case to court

There are 22 comments on the Local Breaking News story from Nov 14, 2008, titled Fired Akron officer takes residency case to court. In it, Local Breaking News reports that:

An Akron police officer is taking his firing to court, claiming he is being wrongly discharged because of the city's residency law.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Local Breaking News.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Kevin C Freeman

Canton, OH

#1 Nov 15, 2008
Residency Laws were needed when those that served as police or fire men were on call and needed to get to the problem in a matter of minutes. Today we have FULL time people in this positions and the need to have such laws in place are just BS. But then again the mayor of Akron and towns like this are just bullies anyway and need to get out of office.
oh boy

United States

#2 Nov 15, 2008
I N D E N T U R E D
elected to lead

Ravenna, OH

#3 Nov 15, 2008
is that right hoboy??
just saying

Tulsa, OK

#4 Nov 16, 2008
I agree with Kevin, residency laws are archaic. Not living in the city doesn't mean that you do your job any less effectively. Perhaps the choice that he and his girlfriend made when they bought their house was so that she didn't have so far to drive to work. This stupid law effects the whole family

“Lohio Bound”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#5 Nov 16, 2008
oh boy wrote:
I N D E N T U R E D
What do his teeth have to do with anything?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#6 Nov 18, 2008
Fire the bum, he failed to adhere to the rules regarding his employment.

Just another shining example of a crooked cop that thinks the rules apply to everyone but themselves.

Anybody who fails to follow the rules of employment needs to take responsibility for their actions when they get caught.
The Voice of Reason

Tulsa, OK

#7 Nov 18, 2008
Question Authority wrote:
Fire the bum, he failed to adhere to the rules regarding his employment.
Just another shining example of a crooked cop that thinks the rules apply to everyone but themselves.
Anybody who fails to follow the rules of employment needs to take responsibility for their actions when they get caught.
Apparently you have your head inserted in your rectum. The statutes in Ohio say that residency requirements are unconstitutional. The Plusquellic got some court to side with him the other way. So the one who thinks the rules don't apply to him is Akron's idiotic Mayor. I wish Mendenhall success with his recall campaign but I think the stupidity of the average Akronite will be Mendenhalls downfall.
City Worker

Dayton, OH

#8 Nov 18, 2008
Question Authority wrote:
Fire the bum, he failed to adhere to the rules regarding his employment.
Just another shining example of a crooked cop that thinks the rules apply to everyone but themselves.
Anybody who fails to follow the rules of employment needs to take responsibility for their actions when they get caught.
Since you posted your idiotic comments in both plaes, I'll reply here also.

And I'll even keep it really simple so that even someone with your lack of brainpower can understand it: Sleeping overnight at a girlfriend's house DOES NOT establish residency.
Appraisit

Barberton, OH

#9 Nov 18, 2008
City Worker wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you posted your idiotic comments in both plaes, I'll reply here also.
And I'll even keep it really simple so that even someone with your lack of brainpower can understand it: Sleeping overnight at a girlfriend's house DOES NOT establish residency.
Technically, it isn't "just" his girlfriends house...I beleive the article stated he co-owned the house...let's dispense with the charade that he lives with his sister & her husband during the work week and only stays with his girlfriend and "their" house on off days/nights ? And yes, there is room for clarafication, but it's not as if Rootstown is his weekend get away as lovely as Rootstown is....he is and has got caught breaking the requirements of employment no matter how heavy handed it may seem (I for one wouldn't work for the COA...it's a quality of life issue for me)...the Officer needs to decide if he wants that job or does he want to live in Rootstown !
City Worker

Dayton, OH

#10 Nov 18, 2008
Appraisit wrote:
<quoted text>
Technically, it isn't "just" his girlfriends house...I beleive the article stated he co-owned the house...let's dispense with the charade that he lives with his sister & her husband during the work week and only stays with his girlfriend and "their" house on off days/nights ? And yes, there is room for clarafication, but it's not as if Rootstown is his weekend get away as lovely as Rootstown is....he is and has got caught breaking the requirements of employment no matter how heavy handed it may seem (I for one wouldn't work for the COA...it's a quality of life issue for me)...the Officer needs to decide if he wants that job or does he want to live in Rootstown !
And you are a private detective who has followed him for an entire year and knows where he has overnighted every night? Yeah, right. You are just assuming like everyone else is. Only, just as likely, you are one of Don's serfs who have to defend the boss.
Appraisit

Barberton, OH

#11 Nov 18, 2008
City Worker wrote:
<quoted text>
And you are a private detective who has followed him for an entire year and knows where he has overnighted every night? Yeah, right. You are just assuming like everyone else is. Only, just as likely, you are one of Don's serfs who have to defend the boss.
Relax "City Worker", we all know how sensitive you are to this issue, certain things are just obvious and you are letting the issue cloud your thinking.....common sense tells us this , and oh, the COA hired a investigative firm to confirm as well, but never mind the facts of the case....I agree that it is heavyhanded and frankly in my opinion un-American to force someone to live in the City (anywhere less than 5 acres & 400 feet away from my neighbors is too close)but, he agreed to work under those rules when accepting the job ! If he doesn't like it , leave it....Rootstown is beautiful this time of year....

The only "serf" here on this board is you ...you are the "City Worker".....I'm self-employed and answer to no one....well, except maybe my wife and there is no exception as far as she is concerned.....
City Worker

Dayton, OH

#12 Nov 18, 2008
Appraisit wrote:
<quoted text>
Relax "City Worker", we all know how sensitive you are to this issue, certain things are just obvious and you are letting the issue cloud your thinking.....common sense tells us this , and oh, the COA hired a investigative firm to confirm as well, but never mind the facts of the case....I agree that it is heavyhanded and frankly in my opinion un-American to force someone to live in the City (anywhere less than 5 acres & 400 feet away from my neighbors is too close)but, he agreed to work under those rules when accepting the job ! If he doesn't like it , leave it....Rootstown is beautiful this time of year....
The only "serf" here on this board is you ...you are the "City Worker".....I'm self-employed and answer to no one....well, except maybe my wife and there is no exception as far as she is concerned.....
Kinda doubt the CoA hired an investigative firm to check on this cop---much more likely, going by past performance, they used other City employees to do their dirty work. Either way, a WASTE of tax dollars. Besides, the ratio of sleeping in and out of the city doesn't necessarily prove things either. The whole concept of "residence" is very nebulous can mean whatever either side wants it mean.

As for "agreeing" to the residency rule when he took the job, that may or may not be true. He may have(remember, the whole issue is at the Ohio Supreme Court)made himself possibly subject to that "rule" when he was hired, but he may have also believed at the time he was hired that the rule would not withstand a legal challenge.

And he doesn't have to "like it or leave it"---he stays and attempts to change it, or work his way around it.

As for me, no "serf" involved...I can live wherever I want.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#13 Nov 18, 2008
City Worker wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you posted your idiotic comments in both plaes, I'll reply here also.
And I'll even keep it really simple so that even someone with your lack of brainpower can understand it: Sleeping overnight at a girlfriend's house DOES NOT establish residency.
You are an absolute idiot.

The guy co-owns a house with his girlfriend and owns a house in Akron where his sister and her husband live.

Are you stupid enough to believe that he lives in Akron with his sister and her husband and doesn't live in his other house with his girlfriend?

Do you still believe in santa as well?

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#14 Nov 18, 2008
The Voice of Reason wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently you have your head inserted in your rectum. The statutes in Ohio say that residency requirements are unconstitutional. The Plusquellic got some court to side with him the other way. So the one who thinks the rules don't apply to him is Akron's idiotic Mayor. I wish Mendenhall success with his recall campaign but I think the stupidity of the average Akronite will be Mendenhalls downfall.
Voice of stupidity,

You are beyond an idiot. The city had a rule in place when this fool took the job. The rule still stands. He broke the rule. He needs to be man enough to accept the consequences of his actions.

Until the rule is overturned, you either obey it or accept the consequences when you get caught.

There are many things I disagree with and if I don't follow them, I'm man enough to accept the consequences. I wish this fool was man enough as well.

“How I suffered for my sanity”

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#15 Nov 18, 2008
Appraisit wrote:
<quoted text>
Relax "City Worker", we all know how sensitive you are to this issue, certain things are just obvious and you are letting the issue cloud your thinking.....common sense tells us this , and oh, the COA hired a investigative firm to confirm as well, but never mind the facts of the case....I agree that it is heavyhanded and frankly in my opinion un-American to force someone to live in the City (anywhere less than 5 acres & 400 feet away from my neighbors is too close)but, he agreed to work under those rules when accepting the job ! If he doesn't like it , leave it....Rootstown is beautiful this time of year....
The only "serf" here on this board is you ...you are the "City Worker".....I'm self-employed and answer to no one....well, except maybe my wife and there is no exception as far as she is concerned.....
Ha! Ha! I'm self-employed and answer to no one...well, except maybe my husband and there is no exception as far as he is concerned.
hunky77

Akron, OH

#16 Nov 18, 2008
StarryNights wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha! Ha! I'm self-employed and answer to no one...well, except maybe my husband and there is no exception as far as he is concerned.
Well well you are both in the same boat.... How about a wine-cooler. Cheers.@@
Appraisit

Barberton, OH

#17 Nov 19, 2008
StarryNights wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha! Ha! I'm self-employed and answer to no one...well, except maybe my husband and there is no exception as far as he is concerned.
And that works for us.....it goes both ways....and yes Hunky, let's raise a glass or two...

“How I suffered for my sanity”

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#18 Nov 19, 2008
Appraisit wrote:
<quoted text>
And that works for us.....it goes both ways....and yes Hunky, let's raise a glass or two...
Cheers to you this fine morning! Perhaps some "Three Olives Triple Shot Expresso" in coffee?
City Worker

Dayton, OH

#19 Nov 19, 2008
Question Authority wrote:
<quoted text>
You are an absolute idiot.
The guy co-owns a house with his girlfriend and owns a house in Akron where his sister and her husband live.
Are you stupid enough to believe that he lives in Akron with his sister and her husband and doesn't live in his other house with his girlfriend?
Do you still believe in santa as well?
See my post on the other thread. He may spend a lot of time with his girlfriend, and even sleep over, but his legal residence could easily be somewhere else.
City Worker

Dayton, OH

#20 Nov 19, 2008
Question Authority wrote:
<quoted text>
Voice of stupidity,
You are beyond an idiot. The city had a rule in place when this fool took the job. The rule still stands. He broke the rule. He needs to be man enough to accept the consequences of his actions.
Until the rule is overturned, you either obey it or accept the consequences when you get caught.
There are many things I disagree with and if I don't follow them, I'm man enough to accept the consequences. I wish this fool was man enough as well.
So now you show your true colors. Your posting-name shouldn't be "question authority" but "blindly obey authority".

First, we have a difference of opinion between the officer and the control-freaks in City Hall.

Second, the State of Ohio has already passed legislation invalidating the City's residency rule. It's only in court now because they City is too stubborn to realize State law trumps City law.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Akron Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Wonder why God did this (Dec '09) May 21 dGo mnaDed lyHo i... 5
News VIDEO: Black bear spotted in Akron, has own Twi... May 20 lil Tyree 2
BOYCOTT Humane Society of Greater Akron! "Paws... (May '10) May 16 X employee 21
wino pete (Nov '15) May 16 Homeless Wino Pete 15
News Body discovered in Barberton alley (Aug '08) May 11 BPD 187
if you liked nafta ...... May 10 El Chapo 1
Welcome to crakron! May 9 capt Pepe 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Akron Mortgages