Akron has increased the penalty for individuals convicted of menacing city employees, such as elected officials.
Council recently passed an ordinance increasing the penalties for menacing from a fourth- to first-degree misdemeanor, which sets a minimum sentencing of three days鈥� jail time for offenders.
The vote for the legislation came on the when they became vocal after a controversial land sale was approved.
That was a coincidence, said Ward 6 Councilman Brad McKitrick, who sponsored the menacing legislation.
鈥淚t actually would have come in prior to this, because we took time on it 鈥� and it just coincidentally came in that same night,鈥� McKitrick said. 鈥淚 think there鈥檚 a little bit more read into it than what truly, actually, happened.鈥�
McKitrick introduced the legislation the previous week, but councilmembers took a week鈥檚 time before taking a vote due to some initial concerns.
Councilmembers Shammas Malik and Tara Mosley had expressed hesitancy that some individuals accused of menacing might be experiencing a mental health issue and would be sentenced to jail under the ordinance.
Officials from the city鈥檚 law department said that wouldn鈥檛 be the case, McKitrick added.
鈥淛udges have total discretion and deal with this constantly, and they would channel those people appropriately, to get help from a health provider if that were the case,鈥� McKitrick said.
The legislation ended up passing 12 to 1, with Councilman Russ Neal the sole 鈥渘ay鈥� vote.
McKitrick, a retired Akron firefighter, previously introduced a similar bill passed in April that increased penalties for people convicted of menacing utility employees while out on the job, he said.
McKitrick said he鈥檚 heard of workers being threatened or robbed while doing their jobs.
鈥淓mployees have been out in a place where they鈥檙e vulnerable,鈥� he said. 鈥淚f you鈥檙e down in a pit working on wiring that鈥檚 down in the ground, you鈥檙e not watching somebody coming up on you, and they just say 鈥榦h, this is easy prey鈥� and they鈥檒l come up and they鈥檒l rob them.鈥�
Council Vice President Jeff Fusco approached him with an idea to extend the ordinance to cover all public employees, including city workers and elected officials, in November. McKitrick said there鈥檚 been increased concern after a councilmember鈥檚 car was damaged during protests over the summer.
鈥淩ather than wait and be reactive, the purpose of this was to be proactive, and to show that there鈥檚 going to be some changes for protections for people,鈥� McKitrick said.
When residents were permitted back into the Dec. 12 meeting for public comment, some of them spoke out against the menacing legislation.
鈥淚t is, ultimately, another slide in the fascist direction. It really is. It crushes dissent,鈥� said Ben Gifford, a member of Akron Democratic Socialists of America.
Another resident, environmental activist Beth Vild, referenced the legislation in her comments to council.
鈥淭oday, I鈥檓 going to speak a little bit more from the heart, and I might get arrested for menacing because of it,鈥� she said.
McKitrick said disagreeing with public officials or speaking out in a council meeting does not necessarily constitute menacing.
There is certain criteria that must be met for officials to investigate and prosecute menacing complaints, he said.
鈥淲e can鈥檛 just say, because we鈥檙e on council, 鈥極h, arrest them because I feel like they鈥檙e going to attack me, or they might cause damage to me, to my property or a family member,鈥� he said. 鈥淸The police] aren鈥檛 just going to do what we tell them because we feel that we鈥檙e going to be attacked.鈥�
The Ohio Revised Code鈥檚 states, 鈥淣o person shall knowingly cause another to believe that the offender will cause physical harm to the person or property of the other person, the other person's unborn, or a member of the other person's immediate family.鈥�
Council also passed legislation introduced by Councilwoman Tara Mosley that increased the penalties for menacing poll workers and election officials back in November.
