Additives in a Municipal Water Supply
My question involves public health law in the State of: Ohio
The people of my city amended the city charter to prohibit specific actions of its public utilities from preforming specific tasks.
I want to know how to hold the city accountable for this violation so that the will of the people is enforced.
Quote:
Notwithstanding [In spite of] any ordinance or resolutions which heretofore [before] may have been enacted,
the addition of any substance to the public water supply for the purpose of affecting the bodies
or the bodily or mental functions of the consumers hereby is prohibited.
It goes on to list some specifically and explicitly named substances that are prohibited in "whatever state, and all other drugs
and chemicals, antibiotic or otherwise, which could affect the consumer's bodily functions in any
manner."
The city is in a very clear breach of this prohibition.
The first sentence (as noted above) retroactively invalidates any ordinances or resolutions that may have previously allowed such substances.
Worst is the city is actually supplementing the specific and explicit additives listed by name.
The city, to it's own detriment, publishes a report on how much of these prohibited chemicals they add. It is very very easy to prove.
I would like to know what recommendations others might have for proceedings against my city's negligence.
Re: City Violates City Charter
What are you babbling about? Chlorination?
Re: City Violates City Charter
Re: City Violates City Charter
If so, it's a matter of state law preemption:
Quote:
Quoting O.R.C. 6109.20 Maintaining fluoride content of public water supply.
If the natural fluoride content of supplied water of a public water system is less than eight-tenths milligrams per liter of water, fluoride shall be added to such water to maintain fluoride content of not less than eight-tenths milligrams per liter of water nor more than one and three-tenths milligrams per liter of water beginning:
(A) On or before January 1, 1971, for a public water system supplying water to twenty thousand or more persons;
(B) On or before January 1, 1972, for a public water system supplying water to five thousand or more persons, but less than twenty thousand persons.
Re: City Violates City Charter
It's about prohibited additives to include drugs, chemicals, et al.
You're not helping. If you aren't interested to or capable of answering the question then please don't waste my time.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Don't waste ours.
It should be obvious to anyone with a room-temperature IQ that if you have proof of a violation for which you have legal grounds to sue, you call a lawyer.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Mr k is quite capable of helping. I can generally help as well but without some specifics nobody can help you so either grow up and provide what is needed or go to your room and pout because nobody will play with you. It's your choice.
Re: City Violates City Charter
I'm not afraid to file some documents. Not everyone is in a position to hire an attorney. Nor do I believe the lack of funds to hire one constitutes a waiver of my right to redress. If actual expert-law discussion is something you would like to engage in - please do share.
However, if your scope of expert-law advise ends with calling a lawyer - why bother building a forum? You could have accomplished that with a single html page.
Here:
Code:
<html>
<body>
<h1>Need advise?</h1>
<p>Call a lawyer.</p>
</body>
</html>
Re: City Violates City Charter
An internet forum cannot file a lawsuit for you.
You have yet to convince me, however, that you have any grounds on which to file one. Why don't you start by telling us, SPECIFICALLY, what the city is doing in violation of what law.
Re: City Violates City Charter
as Mr. K already pointed out, they could not do what you want them to do even if they wanted to do so, they are mandated by state law.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Quote:
Quoting
Mr Jefferson
I'm not afraid to file some documents. Not everyone is in a position to hire an attorney. Nor do I believe the lack of funds to hire one constitutes a waiver of my right to redress. If actual expert-law discussion is something you would like to engage in - please do share.
However, if your scope of expert-law advise ends with calling a lawyer - why bother building a forum? You could have accomplished that with a single html page.
Here:
Code:
<html>
<body>
<h1>Need advise?</h1>
<p>Call a lawyer.</p>
</body>
</html>
again, if you want anything more than "call a lawyer", then you are going to have to pony up with some information. So, it's now up to you to either provide what is necessary to move the discussion forward or throw a tantrum complaining about nobody helping you.
Re: City Violates City Charter
No, Mr K did not provide any relevant information;
Neither am I complaining due to lack of help.
I am not here to debate legal theory or convince anyone of anything. I'll save that for court.
If this was a color of law issue by a state actor and the depravation of rights due to negligence I would file a 42 USC 1983 claim.
That would constitute a relevant response to the question posed: My rights are being violated by local and/or state officials in violation of the Ohio Revised Code, what can I do?
My question is this: My city is violating the city charter establishing their authority and specifically violating a prohibited activity enacted by the people of this city, what can I do?
It doesn't matter if it was salt or jellybeans that are prohibited. Whatever it is that is being violated - what course of action can I take?
If this is to difficult for you to respond - please move along. Save your debates for people who are interested.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Quote:
Mr Jefferson;853435]No, Mr K did not provide any relevant information;
Neither am I complaining due to lack of help.
I didn't say he provided help. I said he can provide help but you are obviously not willing to provide any information that would allow anybody to help. Due that, about the only thing that can be said is; feel free to hire an attorney, who will charge you by the hour and is likely willing to listen to you for hours on end as long as you are paying him, or, willing to wait for you to speak, again, as long as you are willing to pay him.
There is specific information required to be able to give you any direction. You choose to withhold that information.
I will give you 2 actions but since the specific additive is important, only one may provide you any relief.
get bottled water
file for a writ of mandamus where the courts require the city to comply with the prohibitions enacted.
Quote:
It doesn't matter if it was salt or jellybeans that are prohibited. Whatever it is that is being violated - what course of action can I take?
it does matter what the additive is though. Depending on what the additive is, as you have seen by the law on flouride, the local ordinance may not be enforceable against the additive. There are also possibilities that would allow you to invoke the assistance of other governmental departments. Additionally, depending on the additive, there are situations where an expedited process may be available.
If this is to difficult for you to respond - please move along. Save your debates for people who are interested.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Quote:
Quoting
Mr Jefferson
It's about prohibited additives to include drugs, chemicals, et al.
What drugs?
What chemicals?
Name them.
Quote:
Quoting
Mr Jefferson
You're not helping.
And you're not providing any information on which anybody can base any helpful comments.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Quote:
Quoting
Mr Jefferson
No, Mr K did not provide any relevant information;
Neither am I complaining due to lack of help.
I am not here to debate legal theory or convince anyone of anything. I'll save that for court.
If this was a color of law issue by a state actor and the depravation of rights due to negligence I would file a 42 USC 1983 claim.
That would constitute a relevant response to the question posed: My rights are being violated by local and/or state officials in violation of the Ohio Revised Code, what can I do?
My question is this: My city is violating the city charter establishing their authority and specifically violating a prohibited activity enacted by the people of this city, what can I do?
It doesn't matter if it was salt or jellybeans that are prohibited. Whatever it is that is being violated - what course of action can I take?
If this is to difficult for you to respond - please move along. Save your debates for people who are interested.
You are more than welcome to take your .... words... to a place where people are interested in your nonsense.
Re: City Violates City Charter
He's obviously concerned with his precious bodily fluids.
He doesn't shun women, but he does deny them his essence.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
You have yet to convince me, however, that you have any grounds on which to file one. Why don't you start by telling us, SPECIFICALLY, what the city is doing in violation of what law.
Google suggests that we're talking about Dayton, but as the immature child who started this thread isn't willing to specify any chemical it's a waste of time to respond to him. I suggest that he switch to a different forum where he can get instructions on the construction of tin foil hats.
Re: City Violates City Charter
Quote:
Quoting
Mr Jefferson
It doesn't matter if it was salt or jellybeans that are prohibited. Whatever it is that is being violated - what course of action can I take?
What you fail to grasp is that the details DO matter. What the substance is and what steps the city took to do what it did are incredibly important details. What your options are depend on those sorts of details. Your posts suggest you aren't all that familiar with the law and legal remedies. Since you don’t wish to share the details here, try meeting with an Ohio attorney and providing all the details to him/her. That’s going to be the much better way to go than trying to get specific answers to what amounts to a very vague question.
Re: Additives in a Municipal Water Supply
If you are willing to push the limits at your own expense, go for it. There are 2 likely outcomes. The first being the statute is revoked. The second is they build a multi million dollar filtering plant for naturally occurring drugs and then tax the crap out of all property owners and allow landlords to pass that on to renters. It would likely be more productive for you to take out billboard reminders for people using the water supply to not flush pills and instead mix them in kitty litter or dirt then put them into the trash so they do not end up in the water supply.
Re: Additives in a Municipal Water Supply
Quote:
Quoting Dayton City Charter, Sec. 175. Public Water Supply.
Notwithstanding any ordinance or resolutions which heretofore may have been enacted, the addition of any substance to the public water supply for the purpose of affecting the bodies or the bodily or mental functions of the consumers hereby is prohibited. The additives so prohibited include sodium fluoride and all other fluorides in whatever state, and all other drugs and chemicals, antibiotic or otherwise, which could affect the consumer's bodily functions in any manner.
The foregoing shall not be deemed to apply to minerals or chemicals deemed necessary to eliminate bacterial or other impurities, provided however, that public notice shall be given semiannually of the nature of the additives so used and the amount thereof.
This amendment shall take effect upon adoption by the electorate.
(Adopted by voters, 5 - 4 - 65)
Dayton does publish what it adds to water.
Quote:
At the water treatment plants lime is reacted with minerals in water to reduce “hardness”. Then, carbon dioxide, fluoride and chlorine are added. Rapid sand filtration is the final step in the treatment process.
So we're talking about the use of lime to reduce water hardness -- that is, to remove "other impurities" -- carbon dioxide to replace mineral acids and to reduce acidity (more "impurities"), with the added benefit of a reduction of mineral scale and pipe corrosion, chlorine to control bacterial impurities, and fluoride as required by state law.
It's no small wonder that our OP doesn't want to disclose the chemicals that supposedly concern him, as even he knows he would be laughed out the room.