Recordpub.com - McClafferty to run for council Will fight Streetsboro age restriction of 23 to run for seat

By Miles Jung-Kilbreath
Record-Courier staff writer
STREETSBORO " Twenty-one-year-old resident Brett McClafferty wants to take another shot at running for a citywide office, and says he's willing to fight the city's age limit requirement in doing so.
McClafferty announced in a Jan. 3 news release he plans to run for an at-large City Council seat in the May primary election.
However, a charter amendment passed by residents during the November 2007 election requires anyone holding office to be at least 23 years old. McClafferty said if his candidacy is denied, he will file a legal complaint in federal court to get the charter amendment declared unconstitutional.
"The age requirement is not only arbitrary, but it is in complete contradiction to the message the nation is trying to send to our youth to become involved. It promotes apathy, and is extremely offensive to young individuals risking their lives overseas serving in the armed forces," McClafferty stated in the press release.
McClafferty lost the May 2007 prirmary mayoral election by a single vote to former planning director Linda Kovacs.
The three at-large council seats are held by Art Scott, Pete Buczkowski and Julie Sanders. If more than five residents file with the Portage County Board of Elections to run for the seats, there will be a May primary. The top five vote getters in the primary would then move on to the November general elections.
The Portage County Board of Elections said that no one has yet filed for the at-large council seats. The deadline for candidates to file petitions is Feb. 19.
McClafferty said he is Chairman of Young Citizens for a Better Ohio, a non-partisan political action committee of more than 150 members, and is in a law undergraduate program at Cleveland State University majoring in Urban Studies.
"The arbitrary limitation on political candidacy based on post-18 age requirements is an unreasonably restrictive device which violates the Constitution of the United States. What possible reasonable governmental interest can be advanced by the limitation?" said McClafferty's attorney Avery Friedman.
Mayor Tom Wagner said he would wait to see if McClafferty files any legal complaint before the city decides how to proceed. He said the city "has to follow the charter" and not allow McClafferty to run for council.
"We can't make any special exceptions," Wagner said.

15.	Posted by Matt Bross January 7, 2009
	Imposing age restrictions is no different than imposing racial, gender or socioeconomic restrictions, this covenant is clearly wrong. Also in this case, the assumption is also made that individuals who are pursuing a higher education or like many in my case, that have attained one, is simply a product of "book smarts" and a lack of "real world experience and lifelong wisdom". If pursuing a higher were that easy or not that significant, there would be 80% of adults with at least a Bachelor's Degree or higher, not the other way around. It appears that McClafferty's life ambitions are strong and he is attaining his goals, the path he is on alone makes him more than qualified to hold a local-level elected office. It is not like he is running for Congress. This also sends the wrong message not only to young adults in McClafferty's age bracket but to those still younger adults in their 30s or early 40s like myself who have a strong desire to become more involved with their communities and making them a better place. The age composition of the current Streetsboro Council is proof in the pudding: http://cityofstreetsboro.com/government/citycouncil/index.html The status quo cannot have their cake and eat it too and pick and choose who gets involved and to what extent their involvement will be. The world does not work and evolve that way. Imposing restrictions like this is not the natural order of things. Ultimately, these attitudes are not restricted to Portage County, this is a common and a self-damaging mindset that is plaguing Northeast Ohio and beyond. Many people voted for Barack Obama for "Change" but it is safe to assume they voted for him for his party affiliation. I would say put your money and ideals where your mouth and mind are and you want to see your community improve, it would be wise to be open to new people and ideas, doing that is a critical step in making things better for all of us.

12.	Posted by Tessio Antilago January 6, 2009
	when popular opinion conflicts with the constitution, the constitution prevails. The constitiution not only represents the fundamental will of the people, but it acts as a referee in a world that can often be irrational. Fascist Germany supported Hitler's enthnic cleansing, popular opinion was on Hitler's side, doesn't take away from the fact that it was genicide. Assuming the age requirement ballot issue was presented fairly (which i'm not sure it was), it still doesn't justify the civil rights violations that it imposes.

8.	Posted by CmdrKJon January 6, 2009
	Let him run for office. Check his merit, plans and ideas and vote for who you think is best suited for office. Being a mechanic for 30 years sounds like a fantastic backround for the political arena. You learn how to troubleshool and fix problems. Many of these "educated" public officials have no clue about the concerns of a common mechanic, plumber or handyman. Give me common folk with a little horse sense over some educated idiot any day.

7.	Posted by sowhat January 6, 2009
	Going to war has nothing to do with the voice of the citizens voting in a age restriction for their city. Then McClafferty you are saying that the constitutional right of the registered voters have NO voice in what they want. The actions on your part is blinded to the choice that your fellow voters have elected...to only suit your needs when needed. Typical of a politician to bully their way through calling it arbitrary, insignificant, petty, unconstitutional for their own personal gain. Why vote? When you can overturn what the people wanted.