[ back ]
Trustee widens case in Sunshine Law suit
(by Joseph Koziol Jr. - October 29, 2008)
Trustee widens case in Sunshine Law suit
By JOSEPH KOZIOL JR.
Claridon Township Trustee Mary Briggs has filed an amended complaint against her fellow trustees, adding to the number of meetings in which she claims Ohio's Open Meetings Law was violated.
The amended complaint was filed Oct. 15 in Geauga County Common Pleas Court and cites 81 Township Trustees meetings in which she claims violations occurred. An original lawsuit filed with the courts on Aug. 20 had cited 32 such meetings by the board. The amended complaint cites meetings that occurred during 2006 through 2008.
Ms. Briggs said the amended complaint more accurately represents the total number of meetings in which the various infractions occurred. They include failure to notify the public of some meetings, conducting business outside meetings and improper use of closed-door meetings, as well as procedural errors, she said.
"Every single meeting in the last two years violated that section," she said of Ohio Revised Code 121.22. Also known as the Ohio Sunshine Law, the section deals with open-meeting rules for all public bodies.
Trustees David Brockway and Edward Ward, who have been named as defendants in the suit, have denied any wrongdoing.
Mr. Brockway previously expressed disappointment with the filing and said "99 percent" of the claim was false. He said there was just one instance in which trustees acted improperly, and that action was corrected, following the advice of the Geauga County Prosecutor's Office. "We do not cut out the public or make decisions outside meetings," he said.
Ms. Briggs said some violations may be considered "technicalities," while others were "blatant" disregard for the law.
She said she made numerous attempts during the meetings to ask trustees to correct their mistakes. Three of those requests are recorded in the meeting minutes, she said. But each request was rebuffed, she said. "Their attitude was, you're wrong, and we're right."
Ms. Briggs said the actions taken by trustees were allowable under Ohio law, but the way trustees went about it was wrong. A roll-call vote, or resolution, instead of a motion, would have made the board's actions proper in some instances, she said. "You can do everything they do, but just a little different."
Ms. Briggs said the amended complaint was done to include meetings over the past two years when the violations occurred. She said she was operating under a two-year statute of limitations and had to file the initial complaint to cover meetings that occurred two years ago in August.
The suit seeks a court order for an injunction to prevent further violations of state law. It also seeks to invalidate any actions taken as a result of the violations. In addition, it seeks damages, costs and attorney fees.
[ back ]
