{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-18","fingerprint":"ewai:us:efda2f","proof":"sha256:da2ed028b42f3f42073cd89b0c642a5114a05d0626be85f02299ffae62fa288c","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226","para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231","para_232","para_233","para_234","para_235","para_236","para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251","para_252","para_253","para_254","para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258","para_259","para_260","para_261","para_262","para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273","para_274","para_275","para_276","para_277","para_278","para_279","para_280","para_281","para_282","para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305","para_306","para_307","para_308","para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313","para_314","para_315","para_316","para_317","para_318","para_319","para_320","para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330","para_331","para_332","para_333","para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339","para_340","para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348","para_349","para_350","para_351","para_352","para_353","para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358","para_359","para_360","para_361","para_362","para_363","para_364","para_365","para_366","para_367","para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380","para_381","para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388","para_389","para_390","para_391","para_392","para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402","para_403","para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414","para_415","para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420","para_421","para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439","para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448","para_449","para_450","para_451","para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455","para_456","para_457","para_458","para_459","para_460","para_461","para_462","para_463","para_464","para_465","para_466","para_467","para_468"],"kind":"front_matter"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"[Cite as Kennedy v. Heath Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 2025-Ohio-4440.]","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"COURT OF APPEALS","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"LICKING COUNTY, OHIO","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"RICHARD KENNEDY","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"Plaintiff - Appellee","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"-vs-","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"CITY OF HEATH BOARD OF ZONING","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"APPEALS","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"Defendant – Appellant","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"Case No. 2025 CA 00023","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"Opinion And Judgment Entry","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"Appeal from the Licking County Court of","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"Common Pleas, Case No. 2022 CV 1166","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"Judgment: Affirmed","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"Date of Judgment Entry: September 22,","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"2025","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"BEFORE: DAVID M. GORMLEY, P.J.; CRAIG R. BALDWIN, J.; KEVIN W. POPHAM,","paragraph_id":"para_18","court_paragraph":2025},{"text":"J., Appellate Judges","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"APPEARANCES: JONATHAN A. VELEY, for Plaintiff-Appellee; DAVID C. MORRISON,","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"for Defendant-Appellant","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"OPINION","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"Popham, J.","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"{¶1} Appellant, the City of Heath Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA”), appeals the","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"judgment of the Licking County Court of Common Pleas vacating the BZA’s denial of","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"appellee Richard Kennedy’s (“Kennedy”) “Sign Permit Application.” For the reasons","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"below, we affirm.","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"Facts & Procedural History","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"{¶2} On June 3, 2022, Kennedy submitted a “Sign Permit Application” to the BZA","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"for a proposed sign located at 550 Hebron Road in Heath, Ohio. On the application,","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"Kennedy listed the “type of sign” for which he sought a permit as a “digital billboard.” On","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"June 7, 2022, Zoning Inspector Daulton Brown (“Brown”) initially denied the application,","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"due to the height of the digital billboard and because the plan Kennedy submitted did not","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"include the removal of the sign currently located on the property.","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"{¶3} Brown and Kennedy exchanged several emails in which they discussed","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"lowering the height of the digital billboard, removing the sign currently located on the","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"property, and obtaining a permit from the Ohio Department of Transportation. On July","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"14, 2022, Brown sent Kennedy an email stating “[s]o after talking with … our law director,","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"we are going to have to deny the sign for 550 Hebron Rd. due to the sign’s intended use","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"of off-premises advertising that we only allow per ordinance 1187.10 in M-2 zoned","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"districts. If you wish to still pursue this then you will need to fill out a BZA application and","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"submit it to us to get you onto the next meeting agenda.”","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"{¶4} In order to get on the BZA meeting agenda, Kennedy was required to fill out","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"a form used for both “appeals” and “variances.” On July 15, 2022, Kennedy filled out both","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"portions of the form – appeal and variance, stating: (1) he appealed to the BZA due to","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"“the zoning code not being interpreted properly”; and (2) a variance should be granted","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"because he “can meet all of the requirements of the zoning code.” The BZA scheduled","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"a public hearing on August 16, 2022.","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"{¶5} At the August 16th public hearing, Kennedy presented his argument. The","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"BZA members discussed the brightness standards of digital billboards near residential","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"districts, the placement of digital billboards in a B-3 district, the size of Kennedy’s","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"proposed digital billboard, and whether a digital billboard qualifies as a digital sign.","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"Kennedy confirmed he would remove the existing sign located on the property, and stated","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"he modified the height of the proposed digital billboard. At the conclusion of the hearing,","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"the BZA members voted to table the issue in order to allow for further review by the law","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"director.","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"{¶6} The BZA set the matter for a second public hearing on September 20, 2022.","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"On that date, Kennedy’s legal counsel sent a letter to the law director summarizing","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"Kennedy’s argument as to why his appeal should be granted. At the second public","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"hearing Kennedy presented arguments in support of his appeal. The BZA members again","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"discussed both the size and the location of the proposed digital billboard. At the","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"conclusion of the hearing, the members of the BZA voted 4-1 to deny Kennedy’s appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"{¶7} The minutes of the public hearing note the following:","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"Richard Kennedy is appealing the Zoning Inspector’s decision denying Mr.","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"Kennedy’s application, dated June 3, 2022, to permit the erection of a digital","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"outdoor billboard, for off-premises advertising, and with a screen size of","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"more than 100 square feet, at 550 Hebron Road . . . Motion by Van Winkle","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"to affirm the Zoning Inspector’s decision. Second by Day. Roll Call Vote.","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"Van Winkle, aye. Stewart, aye. Cadenhead, aye. Rosato, nay. Day, aye.","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"Case 8-2022 – 550 Hebron Rd. The Zoning Inspector’s decision denying","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"Mr. Kennedy’s application to permit the erection of a digital outdoor","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"billboard, for off-premises advertising, and with a screen size of more than","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"100 square feet, at 550 Hebron Road is affirmed.","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"{¶8} On October 17, 2022, Kennedy appealed the BZA’s September 20, 2022,","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"decision to the Licking County Court of Common Pleas. On October 27, 2023, the BZA","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"filed the transcript of the proceedings pursuant to R.C. 2506.06. On December 12, 2023,","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"Kennedy filed his brief. On January 9, 2024, the BZA filed its brief. On January 29, 2024,","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"the trial court held a non-oral hearing.","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"{¶9} On April 9, 2025, the trial court issued a judgment entry vacating the denial","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"of Kennedy’s permit and remanding the matter for further proceedings. The trial court","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"specifically found sections 1187.10(b) and 1187.10(h) of the Heath Codified Ordinances","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"to be in conflict and, thus, the court resorted to rules of statutory interpretation to conclude","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"that the BZA’s affirmance of Brown’s denial of the permit was in error.","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"{¶10} The BZA appeals the April 9, 2025, judgment entry of the Licking County","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"Court of Common Pleas and assigns the following as error:","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"{¶11} “THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF CODIFIED LAW BY","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"VACATING A ZONING BOARD’S DENIAL OF A SIGN-PERMIT APPLICATION.”","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"Standard of Review","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"{¶12} R.C. 2506.04, which sets forth the applicable standards of review for the","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"court of common pleas and appellate court, provides in pertinent part:","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"[T]he court may find that the order, adjudication, or decision is","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable, or unsupported","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"by the preponderance of substantial, reliable, and probative evidence on","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"the whole record. Consistent with its findings, the court may affirm, reverse,","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"vacate, or modify the order, adjudication, or decision, or remand the cause","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"to the officer or body appealed from with instructions to enter an order,","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"adjudication, or decision consistent with the findings or opinion of the court.","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"The judgment of the court may be appealed by any party on questions of","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"law as provided in the Rules of Appellate Procedure, and, to the extent not","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"in conflict with those rules, Chapter 2505 of the Revised Code.","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"{¶13} This case centers around the statutory interpretation and/or construction of","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"the City of Heath’s municipal ordinances. Both Kennedy and the BZA agree that, because","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"the issue is one of statutory interpretation and/or construction, this Court’s review is de","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"novo. “Interpretation of a zoning ordinance raises a question of law within the court of","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"appeals’ limited review in an R.C. 2506.04 appeal.” Bierlein v. Grandview Hts. Bd. of","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"Zoning Appeals, 2020-Ohio-1395, ¶ 22 (10th Dist.); Cleveland Clinic Found. v. Cleveland","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 2014-Ohio-4809, ¶ 25 (“a question of statutory construction","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"presents an issue of law that we determine de novo”).","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"Ordinances","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"{¶14} In September of 2001, the City of Heath codified Ordinance Number","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"1187.10 “Signs – General Requirements”. This includes subsection (h), entitled","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"“Billboards.” Pertinent to this appeal is subsection (h)(1) - “[b]illboards are hereby defined","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"as any sign with over 100 square feet of advertising for off-premise business” and section","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"(h)(2)(A) - “[o]utdoor advertising billboards shall be permitted only in M-2 Districts ***”.","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10.","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"{¶15} In August of 2014, the City of Heath amended subsection (b) of Ordinance","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"1187.10. Subsection (b) is now titled, “[a]nimated, mechanical, and digital signs and","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"billboards,” and provides, in pertinent part, as follows:","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"(1) Purpose and intent. The intent of this subsection is to provide","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"standards allowing utilization of specific types of mechanical moving signs","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"and billboards and digital signs and billboards that create digital images that","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"are changed every few seconds by computers. The purpose of the","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"standards is to protect residential areas from exposure to light and motion","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"sequences involving lighted messages that exceed those of existing","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"signage, and manage, for safety purposes, the exposure of motorists to","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"excessive distractions caused by visual display adjacent to roadways.","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"(2) Time-and-temperature and digital signs.","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"A. Time-and-temperature signs: Single line electronic time and","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"temperature signs are allowed. All other types of mechanical or electronic","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"changeable copy, signs, flashing signs, moving signs and animation signs","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"are prohibited, except as provided herein.","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"B. Digital Signs:","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"***","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"2. Size. *** Multi-tenant sites having more than 200 feet of road","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"frontage may have digital signs with lighted display surfaces of up to 100","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"square feet in area. The entire sign must conform to the height, size,","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"setback, and location requirements currently established for respective","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"zoning district[s].","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"3. Style and brightness. The restriction applicable to digital","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"billboards listed in Sections 1187.10(b)(4)(c) and (d) shall apply to digital","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"signs.","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"4. Location. Digital signs are prohibited everywhere except in the","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"B-3, M-1, and M-2 Zoning Districts. Whenever a proposed digital sign is","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"adjacent to a residential property or a residential district, approval of the","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"Board of Zoning and Building Appeals is required.","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"***","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"(4) Size, height, style, brightness of digital billboards.","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"A. Size: The maximum total sign area for digital billboards shall not","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"exceed that of the billboards they replace, and in no case shall exceed 378","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"square feet. In cases where multiple billboards are attached to a single","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"support system, only one billboard may be a digital billboard.","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"***","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"C. Style: Other than changes of digital image, which shall not occur","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"more frequently than once every eight seconds, restrictions listed in","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"Sections 1187.10(a) and (b) shall apply.","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"D. Brightness: To protect residential areas from excessive pulsating","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"light, the brightness of light emitted from an electronic variable message","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"sign shall not increase by more than 0.3-foot candles . . . [w]ithin 1,000 feet","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"of residences, the brightness may be required to be adjusted to 00.25-foot","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"candles. ***","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"(5) If located on a state highway. If the sign is located on a state highway,","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"the following information must be provided:","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"***","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"(B) A copy of the ODOT permit allowing the proposed electronic","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"variable message sign. ***","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"(7) Permit procedures.","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"***","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"B. Permits are valid for a period of two years from the date of","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"issuance of the permit. At the end of the two-year period, a new permit must","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"be obtained or the electronic variable message (digital) billboard must be","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"removed.","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"{¶16} “The primary goal of statutory interpretation is to give effect to the intent of","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"the enacting body.” Bierlein, 2020-Ohio-1395 at ¶ 22. A court must first look to the","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"language contained in the ordinance itself. Olentangy Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v.","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"Delaware Cty. Bd. of Revision, 2024-Ohio-1563, ¶ 26 (5th Dist.). When the language is","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"plain and unambiguous, this Court must apply it as written. Id. Accordingly, when an","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"ordinance is plain and unambiguous, this Court should not resort to utilizing the rules of","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"statutory interpretation or considering public policy implications. Id.","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"{¶17} A court may interpret an ordinance only when an ordinance is ambiguous.","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Bd. of Cty. Commrs. of Allen Cty., 32 Ohio St.3d 24, 27 (1987).","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"“It is only where the words of a statute are ambiguous or are based upon an uncertain","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"meaning or there is an apparent conflict of some provisions that a court has the right to","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"interpret a statute.” Drake-Lassie v. State Farm Ins. Cos., 129 Ohio App.3d 781, 788","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"(10th Dist. 1998). Ambiguity may arise not only from “the indefiniteness of the meaning","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"of a word or phrase,” but also “from a word or phrase that by itself is ‘perfectly clear in its","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"meaning’ but that becomes ‘clouded with obscurity when considered in relation to other","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"words in a statement containing the word or phrase.’” Dana Corp. v. Testa, Tax Commr.,","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"2018-Ohio-1561, ¶ 23, quoting Pittsburgh Steel Co. v. Bowers, 173 Ohio St. 74, 77","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"(1962). If the language of a statute or ordinance is ambiguous, a court may utilize “rules","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"of statutory construction to determine legislative intent.” Henschen v. Ohio Elections","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"Comm., 2024-Ohio-4592, ¶ 24 (10th Dist.).","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"{¶18} The Supreme Court of Ohio has held that, when analyzing ordinances, a","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"court must be cognizant of two principles. Cleveland Clinic, 2014-Ohio-4809 at ¶ 33.","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"“The first of these principles states that zoning ordinances are to be construed in favor of","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"the property owner because they are in derogation of the common law and deprive the","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"property owner of uses to which the owner would otherwise be entitled.” Id. at ¶ 34.","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"Accordingly, restrictions imposed by zoning ordinances must be “strictly construed” and","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"“limitations by implication” are not permitted. Id. Second, a court should not view a zoning","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"provision in isolation; rather, it should be read “in the context of the entire ordinance.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"at ¶ 35.","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"Location of Digital Billboard","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"{¶19} The BZA contends the trial court committed error by ignoring the plain","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"language contained in Heath City Ordinance 1187.10(h) mandating that billboards are","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"permitted in only M-2 districts. The BZA argues Ordinance sections 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4)","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"and 1187.10(h) are not in conflict because (b)(2)(B)(4) regulates the operational","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"standards of digital billboards such as size, height, and brightness, while (h) regulates the","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"location of digital billboards. We disagree.","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"{¶20} We find the question of whether sections 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4) and","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"1187.10(h) are in conflict depends upon whether a digital billboard qualifies as a digital","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"sign. The phrase “digital sign” is not defined in the City of Heath’s Planning and Zoning","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"Code. However, the term “sign” is defined as “a name, identification, description, display","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"or illustration which is affixed to, painted or represented, directly or indirectly upon a","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"building, structure, parcel or lot and which directs attention to an object, product, place,","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"activity, person, institution, organization, or business.” Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.02(z).","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"Subsection (b)(1) of Ordinance 1187.10 provides that subsection (b) is intended to","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"regulate signs and billboards “that create digital images that are changed every few","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"seconds by computers.” Utilizing these definitions, a digital billboard qualifies as a digital","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"sign pursuant to Chapter 1187 of the City of Heath’s Planning and Zoning Code. We","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"additionally note that, throughout its briefing in both the trial court and this Court, the BZA","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"confirms that digital billboards qualify as digital signs. (BZA Appellate Brief, pp. 2, 8; Trial","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"Brief of BZA at pp. 8, 14).","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"{¶21} Because digital billboards qualify as digital signs, section","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4) is applicable to digital billboards. This section provides that digital","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"signs (and thus, digital billboards) are prohibited everywhere except in B-3, M-1, and M-","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"2 districts. Whereas, 1187.10(h)(2)(A) “Billboards” provides that outdoor advertising","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"billboards are permitted only in M-2 districts.","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"{¶22} Of course, when viewed in isolation, 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4) and 1187.10(h) do","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"not conflict. However, a zoning provision must not be viewed in isolation, “rather, its","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"‘meaning should be derived from a reading of the provision taken in the context of the","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"entire ordinance.’” Cleveland Clinic, 2014-Ohio-4809 at ¶ 35, quoting Univ. Circle, Inc. v.","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"City of Cleveland, 56 Ohio St.2d 180, 184 (1978). When applied to the present","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"circumstances, 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4) and 1187.10(h) conflict because the former allows","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"digital signs (and thus digital billboards) in B-3, M-1, and M-2 districts, while the latter","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"allows outdoor advertising billboards only in M-2 districts. In context of the entire","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"ordinance, these two provisions cannot be read in harmony; thus, we must rely on the","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"principles of statutory construction to resolve the conflict and give effect to Heath City","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"Council’s intent.","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"{¶23} The Ohio Revised Code sets forth several rules of construction to be applied","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"in cases of potentially conflicting statutes. When a general provision conflicts with a","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"specific provision, “they shall be construed, if possible, so that effect is given to both. If","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"the conflict between the provisions is irreconcilable, the special or local provision prevails","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"as an exception to the general provision, unless the general provision is the later adoption","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"and the manifest intent is that the general provision prevails.” R.C. 1.51. Further, “if","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"statutes enacted at the same or different sessions of the legislature are irreconcilable, the","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"statute latest in date of enactment prevails,” and “. . . amendments are irreconcilable only","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"when changes made by each cannot reasonably be put into simultaneous operation.”","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"R.C. 1.52(A) and R.C. 1.52(B).","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"{¶24} Additionally, the Supreme Court of Ohio has addressed rules of statutory","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"construction when considering possibly conflicting statutes, stating that a court, “must","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"harmonize and give full application to all such statutes [statutes bearing upon the same","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"subject matter] unless they are irreconcilable and in hopeless conflict.” Johnson’s","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"Markets, Inc. v. New Carlisle Dept. of Health, 58 Ohio St.3d 28 35 (1991). Here, we","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"cannot give full application to both sections of the ordinance; they are in hopeless conflict.","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"{¶25} Utilizing the rules of statutory construction, we find section","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4) to be the controlling provision. 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4) - Digital Billboards","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"- is the more specific section and was enacted later in time than 1187.10(h)(2)(A) –","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"Billboards, as discussed above. 1187.10(h)(2)(A) is the more general provision, is the","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"earlier adoption of the two sections, and there is no manifest intent that this general","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"provision prevail over the more specific section – 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4), which is the more","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"recent and more specific statutory provision and, thus, is applicable to digital signs,","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"including digital billboards, rather than 1187.10(h)(2)(A). See Summerville v. City of","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"Forest Park, 2010-Ohio-6280.","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"{¶26} There is no dispute in this case that the proposed digital billboard is to be","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"erected in a B-3 district. Pursuant to 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4), digital signs, including digital","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"billboards, are permissible in a B-3 district. Accordingly, the BZA committed error in","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"rejecting Kennedy’s application due to the location of the proposed digital billboard being","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"in a B-3 district.","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"Size of Digital Billboard","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"{¶27} The BZA contends that, even if a digital billboard is permitted in a B-3","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"district, Kennedy’s permit was properly denied because Kennedy’s proposed digital","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"billboard exceeds the 100 square feet limitation contained in 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(2) – Digital","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"Signs-size. While 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(2) contains a 100 square feet limitation,","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"1187.10(b)(4)(A) - Size, Height, Style, Brightness of Digital Billboards-size provides that","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"a digital billboard “shall not exceed that of the billboards they replace, and in no case shall","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"exceed 378 square feet.” We must rely on principles of statutory interpretation to resolve","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"these two conflicting provisions.","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"{¶28} Both of the provisions were enacted at the same time. While all digital","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"billboards are digital signs, not all digital signs are digital billboards. Because digital","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"billboards are a subset of digital signs, 1187.10(b)(4)(A) is the more specific provision.","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"The remaining language contained in 1187.10(b)(4)(4) also demonstrates that it is the","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"more specific provision because this subsection specifically lists and describes the style","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"and brightness standards referenced in 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(3). These specific style and","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"brightness standards are key to achieving the object sought to be obtained by the","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"ordinance, i.e., protecting residential areas from exposure to light and motion sequences.","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"{¶29} Utilizing the rules of statutory construction, we find 1187.10(b)(4)(A) to be","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"the controlling provision. There is no dispute in this case that the proposed billboard has","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"a lighted display surface less than 378 square feet. Accordingly, the BZA committed error","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"in rejecting Kennedy’s application based on the size of the proposed digital billboard.","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"Purpose of Ordinance / Policy Arguments","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"{¶30} The BZA contends the reversal of its denial of Kennedy’s permit is an","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"“absurd result” that is not in compliance with the stated purpose of the ordinance, ignores","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"public safety by failing to adequately protect the public from the flashing lights of digital","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"billboards, fails to give the BZA the deference to which it is entitled, and impermissibly","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"“rewrites” the City of Heath’s Planning and Zoning Code.","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"{¶31} The stated purpose of Ordinance 1187.10(b) is to provide standards for","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"digital billboards in order to “protect residential areas from exposure to light and motion","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":". . . and manage, for safety purposes, the exposure of motorists to excessive distractions","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"caused by visual displays adjacent to roadways.” Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10(b)(1). Our","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"statutory interpretation does not diminish or frustrate the stated purpose of 1187.10(b).","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"As a result of our analysis, digital billboards are prohibited everywhere except in B-3, M-","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"1, and M-2 districts. Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4). Further, digital billboards are","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"limited in size, there are specific standards for the frequency of the changing of digital","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"images on digital billboards, and specific standards for the permitted brightness of digital","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"billboards. Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10(b)(4)(A), (C), and (D). With respect to motorists, in","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"certain scenarios like this one, the applicant must obtain a permit from the Ohio","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"Department of Transportation, which Kennedy has received. Heath Cod.Ord.","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"1187.10(b)(5). Additionally, even if a permit is issued for a digital billboard, the permit is","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"valid for a period of two years; a new permit must be obtained after two years. Heath","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"Cod.Ord. 1187.10(b)(7). None of these safeguards are changed or diminished by our","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"statutory interpretation. The result is not “absurd,” because digital billboards are still","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"regulated in specific ways to meet the stated purpose of 1187.10(b).","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"{¶32} As to the BZA’s argument regarding the lack of judicial deference to the","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"BZA, this Court has previously held that a board of zoning appeals, “must be given due","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"deference in interpreting its own resolution language.” Zickefoose v. Bd. of Zoning","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"Appeals of Green Twp., 2000 WL 1289429, *3 (5th Dist.). However, in the same opinion,","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"this Court also held that zoning restrictions must be “strictly construed in favor of the","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"property owner” because “[z]oning resolutions are in derogation of the common law and","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"deprive a property owner of certain uses of his land to which he would otherwise be","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"entitled.” Id. at *4, quoting Saunders v. Clark Cty. Zoning Dept., 66 Ohio St.2d 259, 261","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"(1981). The Supreme Court of Ohio has stated that, if ordinances conflict, these","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"provisions “must be construed in favor of the property owner.” Cleveland Clinic, 2014-","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"Ohio-4809 at fn. 3. Despite any deference given to the BZA in interpreting the ordinance","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"language, “the scope of restrictions cannot be extended to include limitations not clearly","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"prescribed.” Id. at ¶ 34. In this case, deferring to the BZA’s interpretation would result in","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"including limitations not clearly prescribed by Ordinance 1187.10.","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"{¶33} Finally, this Court is not “impermissibly rewriting” the zoning code. Rather,","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"this Court is interpreting statutory language pursuant to the rules provided by the Ohio","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"Revised Code, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of Ohio. “The question is not what","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"did [city council] intend to enact, but what is the meaning of that which it did enact.” State","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"v. Bollar, 2022-Ohio-4370, ¶ 10. Heath City Council maintains the power “to adopt and","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"provide for the enforcement of zoning classifications, districts, uses, and regulations by","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"ordinance . . .”. Charter of the City of Heath, Ohio, 3.08(h). This decision does not","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"frustrate that power. If council “determines that this should no longer be the law” it “may","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"use its discretion to amend [Ordinance 1187.10] to require a different approach.” Id. at","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"20.","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"{¶34} Based upon our de novo review, we find the trial court did not commit error","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"in vacating the BZA’s denial of Kennedy’s application. The BZA’s assignment of error is","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"overruled, and the judgment of the Licking County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"For the reasons stated in our accompanying Opinion, the judgment of the Licking","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"Costs to Appellant.","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"By: Popham, J. and","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"Baldwin, J. concur;","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"Gormley, P.J., dissents","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"Gormley, J., dissenting","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"{¶35} According to paragraph 24 of the majority opinion, a “hopeless conflict”","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"exists in the ordinances that are at issue in this case. I disagree.","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"{¶36} To the sure, the City of Heath’s ordinances are not a model of clarity, and","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"they could benefit from a systematic reorganization. We ought not lightly presume,","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"though, that the ordinances’ drafters have legislated in self-contradictory terms. See A.","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"Scalia & B. Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts, 180 (2012)","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"(“The provisions of a text should be interpreted in a way that renders them compatible,","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"not contradictory. . . . [T]here can be no justification for needlessly rendering provisions","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"in conflict if they can be interpreted harmoniously”).","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"{¶37} State and federal courts have time and again reminded us that we have a","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"duty to “fit, if possible, all parts [of a statute] into [a] harmonious whole.” F.T.C. v. Mandel","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"Bros., Inc., 359 U.S. 385, 389 (1959). See, e.g., Jones v. Hendrix, 599 U.S. 465, 478","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"(2023) (“Basic principles of statutory interpretation require that we construe [statutory","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"provisions] . . . in harmony, not set them at cross-purposes”); State ex rel. Mirlisena v.","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Elections, 67 Ohio St.3d 597, 599 (1993) (“It is the duty of any court,","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"when construing a statute, to give effect to all of the pronouncements of the statute and","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"to render the statute compatible (to harmonize) with other and related enactments","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"whenever and wherever possible”); Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 551 (1974) (when","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"two provisions “are capable of co-existence, it is the duty of the courts . . . to regard each","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"as effective”).","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"{¶38} The majority’s view that the City of Heath’s ordinances regulating digital","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"signs on the one hand and billboards on the other cannot be harmonized rests, I believe,","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"on a flawed reading of those provisions. Seizing on that incorrect reading, the majority","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"then embraces the view that one or the other provision must give way. I, instead, read","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"the various ordinances differently, and I believe that they can be reconciled.","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"{¶39} The majority begins its journey down the wrong path in paragraph 20,","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"claiming there that “a digital billboard qualifies as a digital sign.” That same view is","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"echoed more emphatically in paragraph 28, where the majority declares that “all digital","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"billboards are digital signs.”","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"{¶40} Yet that cannot be true, at least not always. After all, a digital sign, one","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"ordinance tells us, can be no larger than “100 square feet.” Heath Cod.Ord","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"1187.10(b)(2)(B)(2). In contrast, a digital billboard can be as large as “378 square feet.”","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10(b)(4)(A). So, we know that digital billboards that cover more","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"than 100 square feet but are perhaps as large as 378 square feet are most certainly not","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"digital signs. The majority inexplicably insists otherwise.","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"{¶41} And if, as the majority claims, “all digital billboards are digital signs,” the","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"reasonable reader is left to wonder: Why did Heath bother to use the term “digital","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"billboard” in its ordinances? If every digital billboard is a digital sign, what would be the","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"point of spelling out separate rules in the ordinances for those two supposedly","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"synonymous items?","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"{¶42} I believe that we ought to read the ordinances with an eye toward the view","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"that the City of Heath — by employing the distinct terms “digital billboard” and “digital","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"sign” — does not see the two as interchangeable items. And my view, I believe, comports","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"with our duty when interpreting legislation. See State ex rel. Byk v. Indus. Comm., 2025-","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"Ohio-2044, ¶ 33 (“When interpreting statutes, we must give effect to every term . . . and","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"avoid a construction that would render any provision meaningless, inoperative, or","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"superfluous”) (Quotations omitted.); Dept. of Agriculture Rural Dev. Rural Hous. Serv. v.","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"Kirtz, 601 U.S. 42, 53 (2024) (“Proper respect for Congress cautions courts against lightly","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"assuming that any of the statutory terms it has chosen to employ are ‘superfluous’ or","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"‘void’ of significance”); Matter of Guardianship of A.E.R., 2018-Ohio-1685, ¶ 24 (5th Dist.)","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"(“The principles of statutory construction . . . indicate that separate terms should","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"reasonably be given distinct meaning”).","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"{¶43} The majority’s next misstatement appears in paragraph 21, where we are","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"told that “section 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4) is applicable to digital billboards.” That, in my view,","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"is a conclusion unsupported by the text in question. The ordinance cited by the majority","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"focuses on digital signs, not digital billboards. Those latter two words appear nowhere in","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"the (b)(2)(B)(4) clause, and only by declaring — wrongly — that “all digital billboards are","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"digital signs” (¶ 28 of the court’s opinion) can the majority build its argument that the","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"digital-sign provision in the (b)(2)(B)(4) paragraph must necessarily apply to digital","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"billboards. It does not.","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"{¶44} The majority’s misreading of these provisions leads the court to see a","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"conflict between ordinances where none exists, and that purported conflict now leaves","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"the city with a portion of its ordinances seemingly unenforceable, according to the court.","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"{¶45} Surely the more logical reading of these ordinances — and one that holds","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"true to the text itself and comports with our duty to harmonize multiple statutory provisions","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"— is the view that a digital billboard is a type of billboard. A “billboard,” after all, covers","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"more than 100 square feet and can be as large as 378 square feet. See Heath Cod.Ord.","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"1187.02(c) (a billboard is a sign “exceeding 100 square feet in area”) and Heath Cod.Ord.","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"1187.10(h)(3) (a billboard cannot “exceed 378 square feet”).","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"{¶46} I acknowledge that our job of interpreting the ordinances’ meaning would","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"have been much easier had the city explicitly said that a digital billboard is a type of","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"billboard. Even so, if the reasonable reader is willing to take with me that mental leap","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"and embrace what I believe is inherent in the structure and design of Heath’s sign","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"ordinances as a whole, then no provision of the ordinances conflicts with any other, and","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"we need not embrace the majority’s stance that one provision is the “controlling provision”","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"and another one must be set aside.","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"{¶47} In suggesting that inherent in the ordinances is the implied notion that a","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"digital billboard is a type of billboard, I believe that I am embracing a maxim that higher","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"courts have repeatedly exhorted us to follow: statutory words should be given their natural","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"and ordinary meaning. See, e.g., Buddenberg v. Weisdack, 2020-Ohio-3832, ¶ 10 (“a","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"court must give effect to the natural and most obvious import of a statute's language,","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"without resorting to subtle and forced constructions”) (quotations and brackets omitted);","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1, 9 (2004) (“When interpreting a statute, we must give words","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"their ordinary or natural meaning.”) (quotations omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"{¶48} I do not feel that I am bending the ordinances’ text by inferring that Heath","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"intends digital billboards to be a type of billboard. And I certainly feel that such an","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"inference is more reasonable than the majority’s claim that “all digital billboards are digital","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"signs,” which is expressly inconsistent with the ordinances’ size provisions that cap the","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"surface area of digital signs at 100 square feet and cap the surface area of digital","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"billboards at 378 square feet.","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"{¶49} Once a reasonable reader of the ordinances understands that a digital","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"billboard is a type of billboard, then the ordinances’ logical congruity emerges, leaving us","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"with the not illogical and indeed entirely sensible understanding that, in Heath, a digital","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"sign is a type of sign, whereas a digital billboard is a type of billboard. And the distinction","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"between digital signs and digital billboards is the size: digital signs can be as large as 100","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"square feet, whereas digital billboards cover more than 100 square feet but no more than","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"378 square feet.","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"{¶50} In contrast to the majority’s view that “all digital signs are digital billboards,”","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"I read the ordinances to say just the opposite: no digital sign is a digital billboard, and no","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"digital billboard is a digital sign. My view is correct, I believe, because digital signs are,","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"by definition, always smaller than any billboards (including, I believe, digital billboards).","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"{¶51} And if the reader embraces that understanding of the ordinances, then the","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"location restriction at the heart of this case makes perfect sense. Why would the City of","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"Heath allow digital signs nearly “everywhere” — as Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10(b)(2)(B)(4)","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"says – while restricting billboards (including, I believe, digital billboards) to just one zoning","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"district, as Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10(h)(2) does? Isn’t it obvious? Billboards (including","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"digital billboards) are big, whereas digital signs are small. And as the “Purpose and Intent”","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"section for Chapter 1187 of Heath’s Codified Ordinances explains, the city’s signage","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"regulations are intended, at least in part, to protect the public “from distractions and","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"obstructions that can contribute to traffic and pedestrian accidents.” Heath Cod.Ord.","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"1187.01. Big signs — which in Heath are defined as “billboards” — are more distracting","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"to drivers, perhaps more bothersome to neighbors, and in some places can reduce the","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"value of nearby land and lessen the natural beauty of rural areas.","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"{¶52} Because I read the ordinances’ sign provisions to say that a digital billboard","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"is a type of billboard — which, again, is a reading that is not inconsistent with any provision","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"of the text and is, in my view, entirely consistent with our ordinary understanding of words","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"and consistent with the design and structure of the city’s sign ordinances as a whole — I","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"conclude that Heath Cod.Ord. 1187.10(h)(2)’s location restriction for billboards governs","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"the proposed digital billboard at issue in this case. Heath, under that provision, permits","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"billboards “only in M-2 [zoning] Districts,” and given that the proposed digital billboard","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"would be installed in a B-3 district, I believe that the Board of Zoning Appeals properly","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"denied the proposal. Because the majority — like the trial court — reads the ordinances","paragraph_id":"para_467"},{"text":"at issue differently, I dissent.","paragraph_id":"para_468"}],"word_count":5521,"cites":["359 U.S. 385","599 U.S. 465","417 U.S. 535","601 U.S. 42","543 U.S. 1"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"4c9c2246a51d2ea0ed535f5935a6e4b1e79d1cb11e1c530062bf29ebffeea285","source_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/5/2025/2025-Ohio-4440.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-08T15:45:54.371+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","verification":{"stored_sha256":"4c9c2246a51d2ea0ed535f5935a6e4b1e79d1cb11e1c530062bf29ebffeea285","recomputed_sha256":"4c9c2246a51d2ea0ed535f5935a6e4b1e79d1cb11e1c530062bf29ebffeea285","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-18T02:40:43.094Z"}},"hash":"sha256:da2ed028b42f3f42073cd89b0c642a5114a05d0626be85f02299ffae62fa288c","version":"legal-2026-10-18","expires":"2026-10-19T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-18+legal-2026-10-18+2026-10-18T01:46:51","content_hash":"sha256:da2ed028b42f3f42073cd89b0c642a5114a05d0626be85f02299ffae62fa288c","revalidate_after":"2026-10-18T03:40:43.758Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/ohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-e96803e7a67645ecfbe026c46092e61b","response_hash":"sha256:da2ed028b42f3f42073cd89b0c642a5114a05d0626be85f02299ffae62fa288c"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-04T10:45:21.602Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Aohioctapp-2025-ca-23-2026-05-29&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":20909}}