In My Opinion - by Bob Ruth
October 18, 2026 — Bob Ruth
Ohio has hundreds of lawyers who are experts on election law. With so many attorneys to choose from, a major question has arisen involving a political action committee (PAC) that opposes Grove City’s Issue 28.
Why did the PAC – Save Grove City – pick as its treasurer and attorney a political operative who is one of the nation’s top dark-money specialists?
Issue 28 is a proposed amendment to the city charter that would require voter approval of large industrial developments like data centers. The proposed amendment will appear on the Nov. 3 citywide ballot.
Lawyer David Langdon of Cincinnati has emerged as a key player for Save Grove City’s anti-Issue 28 campaign.
He is listed in Franklin County Board of Elections records as the PAC’s treasurer. Also, Langdon filed legal documents with the Ohio secretary of state’s office registering Save Grove City as a domestic limited liability company.
DARK-MONEY CONSULTANTS RELY ON LANGDON
To characterize Langdon’s legal career as controversial would be an understatement.
For more than 15 years, PACs affiliated with him have been lightning rods for criticism from good-government advocates. The reason: Langdon is known as one of the nation’s go-to attorneys for political consultants who want to create nonprofit PACs that do not publicly identify their well-heeled donors.
PACs affiliated with Langdon have spent tens of millions of dollars supporting state and congressional candidates and ballot-issue causes.
Langdon avoids the limelight. He refuses to speak with news reporters. One national election-law blog characterized him as “the dark money phantom.”
But despite his aversion to publicity, Langdon has been featured in news articles in media outlets like Politico, Huffington Post, Ohio Capital Journal, the Columbus Dispatch, USAToday and the Cincinnati Enquirer, as well as TV and radio stations.
Good-government advocates have criticized dark money PACs for years. They argue that the ability to trace the sources of campaign donations is an important tool in gauging the influence of special interests. Concealing this information by forming dark-money PACs erodes voters’ confidence in our democracy, they add.
Normal PACs created to support or oppose candidates must identify each contributor. Dark-money PACs are different. These PACs receive 501 (c) (4) designations from the IRS because they call themselves “social welfare organizations.” This designation exempts them from identifying donors.
These hidden-donor PACs are used by both Republicans and Democrats and by groups espousing both conservative and liberal causes. Ohio TV outlets are being flooded with ads by these nonprofits.
Dark money PACs are favorites of wealthy businesspeople who don’t want their customers to know they might endorse certain candidates or controversial causes. These businesspeople know elected officials can dole out favors in the form of tax loopholes, reduced regulations and multimillion-dollar government contracts, along with a host of other goodies.
For example, dark-money PACs played key roles in the state’s largest-ever corruption scandal. The scandal resulted in the 2023 conviction of former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder on federal racketeering charges and the suicides of two of his accused co-conspirators.
Householder used dark money to finance the campaigns of legislative candidates who later voted in favor of a $1.3 billion ratepayer bailout of nuclear and coal-fired power plants owned by First Energy and other utility companies.
TWO PACS WITH THE SAME MESSAGE
In Grove City, Langdon’s PAC has financed hundreds of yard signs urging defeat of Issue 28. It also has mailed thousands of campaign flyers to Grove City residents claiming passage of Issue 28 would have all sorts of dire consequences for the city’s future economic growth.
Anti-Issue 28 arguments by Save Grove City are virtually identical to arguments used by another PAC created by Langdon called the Trenton Community Alliance. This PAC urges defeat of a proposed city charter amendment that would ban data centers in the Cincinnati suburb of Trenton, Ohio.
Trenton Community Alliance’s web site contends voter approval of the Trenton ballot issue “would make it harder for our city to bring in investments that help pay for roads and services. If the charter is rewritten . . . the door on future investments, jobs and opportunities stays closed.”
Data center critics contend messages from groups like Save Grove City and Trenton Community Alliance are nothing more than scare tactics. Similar apocalyptic-type messages are routinely used across the nation to blunt criticism of data centers and their wealthy high-tech supporters, these critics contend.
Like the Grove City PAC, Langdon registered the Trenton Community Alliance with the secretary of state’s office as a domestic limited liability company. And, like the Grove City PAC, Langdon is named in reports filed with the Butler County elections board as treasurer of Trenton Community Alliance.
SECRECY SURROUNDED TRENTON DATA CENTER
The grassroots fight against data centers in Trenton is just as heated as the battle against a proposed 310-acre data center in Grove City.
However, data center skeptics in Grove City were luckier than their counterparts in Trenton. Although the Texas developer for Grove City’s proposed data center spent months quietly lobbying City Hall officials, word of the back-door maneuvering leaked out.
Residents besieged officials in Grove City with complaints. A grassroots movement resulted in the Grove City Council voting 6-1 to impose a one-year moratorium on data centers here. Councilman Randy Holt was the lone dissenter.
Unfortunately for Trenton residents, they didn’t discover a data center was being proposed in their town until it was too late. A 140-acre data center had already been approved by Trenton’s City Council by the time grassroots opposition was organized.
However, Trenton residents did launch a campaign to ban any future construction of additional data centers. Residents there will vote Nov. 3 on a proposed charter amendment to ban all future data centers. Developers of a second Trenton data center that would be 4.5 times larger than the first one have postponed their efforts until after the Nov. 3 election.
NO DARK MONEY FOR PRO-ISSUE 28 LAWYER
Robert E. Dintaman of Lakewood, Ohio, is the attorney for Protect Grove City, a grassroots organization that supports Grove City’s Issue 28. Its campaign slogan is People Over Politics.
Dintaman’s background is much different from Langdon’s. Instead of supporting construction of data centers, Dintaman has assisted data center opponents in Grove City and neighboring Pickaway County. (Additional information on Dintaman’s efforts can be found on ProtectGroveCity.org.’s website under the headline “Attorney Statement.”)
Dintaman appears comfortable in the role of underdog. He currently is a Republican candidate for the Ohio Senate from District 23. The Cleveland-area district is heavily Democratic. His chance of winning the seat is considered a long shot. But Dintaman is undaunted. He is running as an outsider who wants to change the political culture at the Statehouse.
And Protect Grove City’s lawyer has never been affiliated with dark-money PACs.
TAXPAYER MONEY FUELS ANTI-ISSUE 28 EFFORTS
Like Dintaman’s campaign for the Ohio Senate, supporters of Grove City’s Issue 28 face an uphill battle. Their opponents are well funded, often with taxpayers’ money.
City Hall financial records show Mayor Ike Stage’s administration has spent at least $30,000 in taxpayer money on the anti-Issue 28 campaign. The taxpayer-financed efforts by the 81-year-old mayor’s administration include mailings to homeowners and assistance from a public relations firm hired earlier this year to promote economic development in Grove City.
Additional taxpayer expenditures on behalf of the anti-Issue 28 campaign are expected during the waning days of the Nov. 3 campaign. Those taxpayer expenditures will be supplemented by money collected by Langdon’s Save Grove City PAC.
Unlike the Langdon/Stage campaign, supporters of Issue 28 are operating on a shoe-string budget. Their campaign finance report – to be filed with the Franklin County elections board on Thursday, Oct. 22 – is expected to show few, if any, large donations.
(For additional information on Attorney Langdon’s dark money connections, see a companion In My Opinion commentary on ProtectGroveCity.org. headlined, “More on David Langdon.”)
