Trending
The Ohio Supreme Court is weighing a case about violations of the state's open meetings law and specifically whether violations should be punished by single or multiple $500 fines.
The man who brought this case to the high court is charging four Trumbull County entities with violating state law in the same manner.
Brian Ames of Ranfield Road, Mogadore, lost his bid for multiple relief in open meeting violations cases against Portage County commissioners and Rootstown Township and in February, he appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court. The court has heard arguments in the Rootstown case, but it will probably take months for them to come to a decision.
Ames also recently filed lawsuits in Trumbull County against the city of Hubbard, plus Champion, Kinsman and Johnston townships, charging their governing bodies with violating the open meetings law.
When contacted by the newspaper, Ames' attorney, Matthew Miller Novak, responded: "Mr. Ames is dedicated to advocating for transparent government throughout Northeast Ohio. The purpose of these lawsuits is to seek a court order prohibiting these governments from continuing to operate without complying with the requirements of the Open Meetings Act to ensure they are functioning transparently as possible. "
In a response filed Tuesday by the city of Hubbard's attorney, Robert Yallech of Youngstown, the document states the Hubbard council members deny all of Ames' claims.
Cherry Poteet, attorney for Johnston Township, states in a document filed with the court on Tuesday that Ames "lacks standing "to bring this complaint in Trumbull County and she also denies all his claims.
Champion and Kinsman's attorney, Mark Finamore, said he has not filed a response in both cases and hopes to do so sometime this month.
Meanwhile, the Trumbull County civil cases are making their way through the Common Pleas Court docket.
The Kinsman case has been assigned to Judge Ronald J. Rice, who has set a status hearing for May 5 in his courtroom.
The Johnston and Hubbard cases have been assigned to Judge Andrew D. Logan, who lastweek set status hearings for May 12 in the Johnston case and June 9 for the Hubbard case. The Champion case is assigned to Judge Peter J. Kontos, who has not scheduled any hearings.
VIOLATIONS CHARGED
Ames' lawsuit against Hubbard alleges city council went into private session on Dec. 7, 2020, without citing any of the permissible reasons. Other violations in Hubbard cited includ a Sept. 7, 2021, session to discuss "employee contracts" without getting into specifics; and an Oct. 18, 2021, session to discuss "contracts" without citing any specific reason.
In the Kinsman case, Ames cites seven violations. They say township trustees violated the open meetings law on April 30, 2020, Oct. 12, 2020, Jan. 11, 2021, Jan. 25, 2021, April 26, 2021, June 14, 2021, and on July 27, 2020.
The first five times, trustees motioned to enter private session for discussing the vague term "personnel," and June 14 the lawsuit states trustees motioned to go into private session to discuss "police." On July 27, 2020, the township board was accused of entering into closed session to discuss "legal issues" with the zoning inspector. According to Ames' lawsuit, under the Ohio Revised Code, a public body may only enter executive session to discuss "pending" or "imminent" litigation with its counsel.
The action against Johnston Township charges its board of trustees with not taking proper meeting minutes during an executive session on July 19, 2021. That suit also claimed the Johnston board entered multiple executive sessions on Jan. 11 citing no reasons under the open meeting law; the lawsuit also claimed the trustees didn't provide a reason for a private session on Oct. 6, 2021.
The Champion lawsuits mentions 11 executive sessions in 2020 and 2021. In the majority of those, they discussed "personnel" matters without announcing a specific reason, the lawsuit states.
$500 PER VIOLATION
All of Ames' lawsuits seek $500 per open meetings law violation.
According to an Associated Press story, Ames has the backing of Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, who argues that someone successfully proving that an illegal meeting happened, "is entitled to one $500 award for every Open Meetings Act violation proved."
A lawyer for Rootstown Township told AP that state law requires only one $500 fine per injunction, an argument supported by local government groups. Allowing multiple $500 fines would inspire open meetings law "bounty hunters" to bring claims against public bodies on the backs of taxpayers, according to attorneys for the local government and also some public officials in Trumbull County.
gvogrin@tribtoday.com