Questions for candidates about...

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

Questions of conflict of interest…
To be posed to present (or past) City Council members, and candidates for that office.

THE SITUATIONS:
While there are many, for the purposes of this exercise attention will be limited to only two situations:
1. The many boards and commissions, which all report to City Council and to which City Council appoints all members, and also appoints themselves as “liaisons”.
2. The Middletown Public Housing Authority, which reports to City Council and to which City Council has appointed themselves, in their entirety, as the sole members.

THE BACKGROUND:
SITUATION 1:
No one questions the fact that the council is allowed to create all of the boards and commissions that they deem necessary to “provide advice” on specific matters in the city. What is in dispute is whether it is either lawful or ethical for council to appoint one, two, or in some cases even three of its members as “liaisons” or any other sort of “ex officio” members of these very same boards and commissions.
Some of the actual “working” boards and commissions (such as the Board of Health, Tax Review, Zoning and Zoning Appeals Board, etc.) operate according to specific regulations of the Ohio Revised Code (ORC). The ORC does NOT allow for “liaisons”, or anything of the like for these specific boards or commissions. Anyone can easily go to Middletown’s Codified Ordinances (Section 1260) and cross-reference to the applicable sections of the ORC to verify this. None of these codes or laws are written in extreme “legalese”, and in fact, most of the language is in such simple terms that even members of city councils should be able to understand. In fact, the Library Board does not even report to council, and only passes their budget through council for forwarding to the County Commission! (City Council is also required to pass along any levy requests from the Library Board of Trustees.) 
You will see that, by law, the boards and commissions such as the Park Board, the Golf Commission, the Tree Commission, Keep Middletown Beautiful, and the like sole duties are to “advise the city council on _________”. (Insert whatever the name of the board or commission implies.) If their duty is to “advise” city council, why on earth does a council member need to be on the very same board or commission, and doesn’t that automatically create a “CONFLICT OF INTEREST” since one reports to the other? How can council members advise themselves without an inherent conflict of interest???
In the past, council members have only had a few, weak defenses of their stance. First, they say that ONLY by having one of their own officially assigned to each board or commission can they keep up with what is going on with the boards and commissions. First, of course this lame defense means that council members don’t realize that the sole purpose of these boards and commissions is to ADVISE COUNCIL!!! THAT is how they are supposed to “keep up”, when the board or commission ADVISES them!!! Also, every one of the board and commission meetings is an OPEN, PUBLIC MEETING (or at least they are supposed to be)! Any or all council members are perfectly free to attend EVERY board or commission meeting as an ORDINARY CITIZEN!!! Of course, then they would have to sit in the peanut gallery with the rest of us ordinary citizens, and they would not be able to STEER meetings in the direction that THEY, themselves, prefer!!! Nor would they be able to “enhance” their resumes with all of this so-called “public service”. By the way, has ANYONE EVER heard one of these “liaisons” report back to the entire council all of the details of “what was going on” with these boards and commissions at the city council meetings??? They claim that is why they simply MUST be appointed to them, yet we never hear them report these supposed elusive goings-on. Surely they wouldn’t be discussing them at some other “prearranged discussion of this city business by a majority of council members” that the public is unaware of, would they??? Well, if they are NOT discussing them in illegal, clandestine meetings, and they aren’t discussing them at regular council meetings, WHY was it again that these “liaisons” are so VITAL to keeping the full council informed????
Next, council members claim that “all the other cities do it.” Well, not ALL other cities do it that way!!! That is simply UNTRUE! They are using a childish excuse that most of us would not accept from our own children when they claim, usually in tears, that “all the other kids are allowed to do it!” Besides, If we are to accept THAT ridiculous excuse, shouldn’t council listen if we cry: “all the other cities have better streets!” and “All the other school districts get better scores!” or “All the other cities have lower taxes!” or “All the other cities have less crime!”???
The other bogus excuse they use is: “That’s the way we’ve always done it.” Well, sorry, but that is also untrue!!! Besides, If “that’s the way we’ve always done it” is a valid reason, how about lowering the city income tax back to “the rate we ALWAYS had” or “keep our streets in as good shape as we ALWAYS did” or maybe even go back to all white, male city commissioners, the way we ALWAYS did it until recently!! Would ANY of them go along with THAT??? (By the way, I do NOT advocate going back to all white, males. I am just trying to illustrate the absurdity of their argument.) However, going back to a “city commission, with an elected chairperson acting as ceremonial mayor” might be a pretty good idea.
In addition to the above, there is settled case law (specifically regarding council members on Library Boards and Park Boards) and numerous Opinions of the Attorneys General (OAGs) which DISAGREE with the council’s and the City Law Director’s view on this subject. I have asked several times in the past for council members to ask for an OAG, but, to my knowledge, they never have done so.

SITUATION 2:
The city council recently appointed themselves, as a body, to be the Middletown Public Housing Authority, and by doing so, authorized themselves to administer both CONSOC’s contract, and all other matters concerning Public Housing in the city of Middletown.
There are so many thing absolutely WRONG about this, I don’t know where to begin!!!
I’ll start with the ORC. 

731.05 Powers of legislative authority. (That means “city council” for those of you on it, or others who don’t understand big words.)

The powers of the legislative authority of a city shall be legislative only, it shall perform no administrative duties, and it shall neither appoint nor confirm any officer or employee in the city government except those of its own body, unless otherwise provided in Title VII [7] of the Revised Code. All contracts requiring the authority of the legislative authority for their execution shall be entered into and conducted to performance by the board or officers having charge of the matters to which they relate. After the authority to make such contracts has been given and the necessary appropriation made, the legislative authority shall take no further action thereon.
Now, those words aren’t very “legalese”. I find it difficult to believe that anyone who cannot comprehend these clearly written principles is qualified to be either a council member, or a city manager, or a city law director! Once council authorizes a contract, and appropriates the money to pay for it, they are DONE with it!!! The contract is signed by the City Manager, and administered (conducted to performance) by others within the city!!! The council can require reports, and conduct inquiries if they suspect problems, and even call the City Manger on the carpet and even DISCHARGE her/him, but council can NOT ADMINISTER CONTRACTS!!! 
Council can create a board to oversee public housing, and have that board report to council (I think that this is true). They can dismiss members of the board, and appoint new members, but they can NOT APPOINT THEMSELVES TO A BOARD THAT REPORTS TO THEMSELVES AND they can NOT ADMINISTER CONTRACTS!!! 
There is NOTHING in the City Charter that gives council the power to change this GENERAL LAW of the State of Ohio, and it would be void if there was. In fact, there is language in the City Charter that DENIES council this power:

SECTION 9. POWER OF CITY COUNCIL.
The powers conferred upon municipal corporations by the Constitution of the State of Ohio, the General Assembly of the State of Ohio, or any other body conferring powers to municipal corporations, and such other additional powers which may have been or may be hereafter conferred upon municipal corporations pursuant to law, shall be exercised by City Council, or under its direction, unless the exercise of such powers shall have been expressly conferred upon some other authority or reserved to the people.
Well, ORC 731.05 (cited above) EXPRESSLY CONFERS the power to “enter into and to conduct to performance” contracts authorized by city council to “OTHERS”!!!
Next let’s turn our attention to ORC 731.02:

731.02, “Qualifications of members of legislative authority.” 
“Members of the legislative authority at large shall have resided in their respective cities, and members from wards shall have resided in their respective wards, for at least one year immediately preceding their election. Each member of the legislative authority shall be an elector of the city, shall not hold any other public office, except that of notary public or member of the state militia, and shall not be interested in any contract with the city, and no such member may hold employment with said city. A member who ceases to possess any of such qualifications, or removes from the member’s ward, if elected from a ward, or from the city, if elected from the city at large, shall forthwith forfeit the member’s office.”
Is anyone going to try to make a case that being a member of a Municipal Housing Authority that administers a $1.5 MILLION contract involving over 1,500 monthly housing vouchers worth what…about $10 Million per year… is NOT a “public office”??? I doubt it, except for our City Law Director or our city council members. And since 731.02 states that: “A member [of a legislative authority] who ceases to possess any of such qualifications…shall forthwith forfeit the member’s office.”, a darn good case could be made that right now, Middletown does NOT have ANY legal city council members!!! When they chose to become members of the Public Housing Authority, they simultaneously forfeited their seats on council!!!
Finally, they created a “board” composed of and only of themselves, that reports only to themselves, that DIRECTLY administers a $1.5 million dollar contract dealing with MILLIONS of dollars worth of housing vouchers yearly, with no oversight, all in contradiction of Ohio General Law and our own City Charter, and they just CANNOT see the inherent “conflict of interest” in this???
I guess that there are none so blind as those who just WILL NOT SEE!!!

Now you have THE SITUATIONS, and THE BACKGROUND, all that is left is:

THE QUESTIONS:
1. As a candidate or sitting council member, will you continue or immediately act to DISCONTINUE the practice of appointing council members to any city board or commission not expressly required by State of Ohio law or Middletown City Charter, or at least refuse to participate in this practice?
2. As a candidate or sitting council member, will you continue the present practice or immediately act to REPEAL the ordinance appointing members of city council as the Middletown Public Housing Authority or at least refuse to participate in this practice?

PS:  please excuse the cutting and pasting included above.  I just thought it was important for folks to see the actual laws to which I referred without doing a lot of sufing..