Get a Yes on 28 yard sign Request one →

“It does not stop growth.”

Robert E. Dintaman has practiced law in Ohio since 1998. He is the attorney who worked with our committee to draft the Community Consent Amendment, and he has put his name and his bar number on what it actually does.

Rob is our attorney, not a neutral observer. He advised the committee through the moratorium effort, drafted the amendment with us, and advised through the negotiations with the City. We are not presenting this as an independent review. We are publishing it because a lawyer with a license to lose has set out, under his own name, what Issue 28 does and what it does not.

Robert E. Dintaman, Esq., LLC
Attorney and Counselor at Law · Lakewood, Ohio

Statement of Robert E. Dintaman, Esq. on the Grove City Community Consent Amendment (Issue 28)

To the Residents of Grove City:

My name is Robert E. Dintaman. I have been a member of the Ohio bar since 1998 and practice from my office in Lakewood. My work has taken me into courtrooms and council chambers across Ohio on municipal, zoning, and constitutional matters. Over the past year, a growing share of that work has been spent in Pickaway County, alongside residents of several communities who found large-scale data center development headed their way with little notice and even less say in the outcome.

That work is how Protect Grove City found me. Earlier this year, members of the group reached out after seeing what their neighbors in nearby communities were doing to protect their homes. A data center campus of more than 300 acres was planned for Grove City, and residents were learning about it only after much of the groundwork had been laid. I agreed to advise them because what they were asking for was reasonable: a meaningful voice in a decision that would shape their city for generations.

I advised Protect Grove City through the moratorium effort and, when it became clear that a more lasting safeguard was needed, worked with the committee to draft the Community Consent Amendment. I have advised the committee through the petition process and through its good faith negotiations with City officials, which produced a compromise version that came before Council in September. I have also advised on the articles and posts the committee has published in response to public questions. This has been a true collaboration. The members of this committee did the research, gathered the signatures, and asked the hard questions, and they have conducted themselves with professionalism throughout.

In my professional opinion, the Community Consent Amendment is a proper exercise of the right the Ohio Constitution reserves to the voters of every Ohio city to amend their own charter by petition. It is also narrow by design. It applies only to the very largest projects: developments of 50 acres or more, or those requiring more than 20 megawatts of electrical power or more than 500,000 gallons of water per day. It does not stop growth. It simply asks that projects large enough to change the character of the city come before the people who live here before they are approved.

I have been genuinely inspired by the people of this part of Ohio. In Grove City and in the communities around it, ordinary residents with jobs, families, and no prior experience in local politics have shown up, done their homework, and stood up for the places they call home. It has been an honor to stand beside them and to collaborate with them every step of the way.

Respectfully,

Robert E. Dintaman, Esq.
Ohio Bar No. 0069555

This statement reflects the author’s professional views on a public ballot issue and is not legal advice to any individual reader.

Read the signed original (PDF)

The original carries his letterhead, his signature and his bar number. We have reproduced the text above word for word so it reads on a phone; the PDF is there so you do not have to take our word for that.

Scroll to Top