Rootstown open meetings violation case goes before Ohio Supreme Court
The Ohio Supreme Court has been asked to decide whether Rootstown has to pay $500 or $7,000 in fines in connection with more than a dozen violations of the state’s Open Meetings Act by the township’s Board of Trustees in 2015 and 2016.
Attorneys representing trustees and Brian Ames appeared before the high court during oral arguments lasting a little under 30 minutes this week.
In a complaint filed in Portage County Common Pleas Court in 2017, Ames accused the board of violating open meetings law 16 times during the previous two years. The court ruled in favor of the township on all 16 violations and Ames appealed in the 11th District Court of Appeals. It reversed the common pleas court on 14 of the violations and sent it back.
More:Commissioners extend offer to talk with man who sued them
Ultimately, after another appeal, a single injunction was issued for all 14 violations and Ames was awarded $500 plus $1,000 of the $1,584 attorney costs he paid.
The amount of $500 is specified in state law for an open meeting violation. Curt Hartman, the attorney arguing for Ames, said the amount should be awarded per violation, or a total of $7,000 in this case.
More:Portage commissioners, solid waste board sued
“The Board of township trustees in this case committed 14 distinct violations of the Open Meetings Act, yet the 11th District ruled that not withstanding the Open Meetings Act, a single civil forfeiture of $500 was in order,” he said. “But we believe that is contrary to both the letter and the spirit of the Open Meetings Act, especially in light of it being remedial legislation that is supposed to be construed liberally in favor of its purposes and its aims.”
More:Randolph man wins court victory
He said that the law only refers to “violation” in the singular, suggesting the $500 is paid for each one.
However, attorney James Matthews, arguing for the trustees, said the law requires the amount to only be paid per injunction.
More:Portage man files complaint with Supreme Court
“After the injunction, the court shall award a civil forfeiture of $500 to the party that sought the injunction,” Mathews read from state law to the justices.
Mathews added, “A fundamental principle of law is that when a statute is clear and unambiguous, you apply it. You don’t have to interpret it.”
More:Legal battles by Brian Ames bring changes to Portage County meetings
Hartman said that as “a practical matter,” a court does not need to issue 14 injunctions when one will do.
Justices have not announced when they will make aa decision on the matter.
When asked for comment Thursday, Brett Housley, chairman of the township’s Board of Trustees, said simply, “We appreciate the opportunity to present our side to the Supreme Court on this matter and we wait for the response.”
Ames has made it something of a mission to observe public bodies in the county and file court complaints when he finds they have allegedly violated open meetings statutes.
He said Thursday that he has pending cases against the county’s Board of Commissioners and Franklin, Freedom and Atwater townships. He also had a couple of past cases against Brimfield, he said, one of which he voluntarily dismissed.
Ames said he is actually pleased with how Rootstown and Brimfield have responded in eliminating open meeting violations since filing his complaints.
“Rootstown is already doing fine. They learned what they needed to learn, and they’re all doing fine and this is all just lawyer quibbling,” he said, adding, “When I saw how good [Brimfield was] doing, I just dismissed the other one. I accomplished what I set out to do.”
Reporter Jeff Saunders can be reached at [email protected].
Read More: Rootstown open meetings violation case goes before Ohio Supreme Court