Twinsburgbulletin.com - Issue 3 is compromise that helped passage of compact

by Marc Kovac

Capital Bureau chief

Columbus -- President George W. Bush recently added his signature to a multi-state agreement that will control future use of Great Lakes waters.

The move capped approval by the U.S. Congress and lawmakers in eight states on the much-debated Great Lakes Compact.

But the federal action may have not come to fruition without a compromise measure approved by Ohio lawmakers earlier this summer, in the form of a constitutional amendment to be decided by voters in November.

The state's passage of the Great Lakes Compact hinged on Senate Joint Resolution 8, offered by Sen. Tim Grendell (R-Northeastern Ohio). His chamber waited, on the last voting session day before breaking for the summer, until the Ohio House OK'd the placement of the constitutional amendment on the general election ballot before acting on the larger compact.

Earlier, Grendell had fought hard against some of the wording in the legislation for the compact, sponsored by Cleveland-area Republican Matthew Dolan. Grendell even offered his own version of the compact with a few words changed.

The most notable differences in the two bills related to what Grendell said could lead to a legal taking of water rights from Ohio property owners. Dolan's version included "tributary groundwater and nonnavigable surface waters," while the Senate version did not.

SJR 8, which is Issue 3 on the November ballot, was the compromise position reached by both sides.

It formalizes, within the Ohio Constitution, property owners' rights to the groundwater on their land. It states that property owners have interests in the groundwater and non-navigable waters located on or flowing through their land and that that water "cannot be held in trust by any governmental body," according to an analysis compiled by the state's Legislative Services Commission.

While no organized opposition groups have formed to counter the issue, the Ohio Ballot Board noted that the amendment could be considered an "unnecessary addition" to the state constitution.

It wrote, "The Supreme Court of Ohio already determined that private property owners have rights to the ground water underlying their land and to the watercourse flowing on and through their land."

It added, "Property owners do not actually own the water beneath their land. They have a right to a reasonable use of that water, but the state always has the power to regulate how it is used and take it for just compensation."

The League of Women Voters of Ohio also opposes Issue 3, noting that its board members believe it is "unnecessary; in addition, it might result in unanticipated changes in land-use rights. In either case, it does not belong in the constitution."

Marc Kovac is the Dix Newspapers Capital Bureau chief. E-mail him at mkovac@dixcom.com.