[ back ]
Claridon meetings are priceless
(by Dave Lange - December 10, 2008)
COUNTY LINE, BY DAVE LANGE
Claridon meetings are priceless
Claridon Township Trustees voted 2-1 recently to pay an attorney $200 per hour to attend their meetings.
Our news reporter, who also gets paid to attend those meetings, may be doing a comparative salary analysis. But I hasten to note that some people actually pay for the privilege of sitting through less entertaining performances at the local cinema.
The Claridon majority, Trustees Edward Ward and David Brockway, said the lawyer's presence is necessary because of the constant questions and objections raised by their nemesis, Trustee Mary Briggs -- who, as a matter of fact, questioned and objected to the hiring.
Ms. Briggs has a lawsuit pending in Geauga County Common Pleas Court, alleging that her fellow trustees violated the Ohio Open Meetings Law 81 times over the past few years. She cited such violations as failure to notify the public of meetings, improper use of closed-door sessions, conducting business outside of official meetings and procedural errors.
Mr. Ward and Mr. Brockway have claimed that Ms. Briggs' lawsuit against them is frivolous. The township's insurance company selected attorney Todd Raskin to represent the pair in the lawsuit. The township's insurance company has not selected an attorney to represent Ms. Briggs' side.
It may be no coincidence that Mr. Raskin is the same attorney who has been hired at $200 an hour by the Claridon taxpayers, without their permission, to attend the Township Trustees meetings.
Ms. Briggs noted that the township is entitled to free legal representation by the Geauga County Prosecutor's Office, which logically should and competently could provide answers to various questions about propriety that may come up at trustees meetings.
But Mr. Brockway said he had been advised that it would be a conflict of interest for the prosecutor's office to provide representation at the Claridon meetings. The suggestion there is that the purpose of having legal counsel at the meetings is to represent the interests of one faction on the board of trustees against the other, while the prosecutor's office is legally bound to represent all three trustees equitably. In other words, Mr. Ward and Mr. Brockway are having the taxpayers foot the bill for their attorney to represent their interests at public meetings. So who's representing the taxpayers' interests? Not the prosecutor's office.
Fortunately, the two-trustee majority did not hire a lawyer at $200 per hour to negotiate a new liability insurance policy for the township. Mr. Brockway took the liberty of shopping around for a new policy on his own, resulting in a savings to taxpayers of nearly $2,000 -- from $9,978 this past year to $7,898 next year. If nothing else, that $2,000 savings will cover 10 hours of the attorney's attendance at township meetings.
Predictably, Ms. Briggs raised questions and objections. She charged that Mr. Brockway had ulterior motives. It seems that the old policy would no longer have covered a certain township road crew employee, one Christopher Brockway, due to a recent conviction for drunken driving on personal time, but the new policy will enable him to continue working and earning a living.
The elder Mr. Brockway denied that there was special consideration for his son. There is no indication whatsoever that the taxpayers were billed at $200 per hour for the son's drunken-driving defense.
[ back ]
