Editor’s note: This letter is in response to the Point/Counter Point article we posted yesterday see it here.
Jorge Pla is responding to Mark V. Guidetti.
Dear Mr. Guidetti:
Thank you for your quick response. It is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, I am surprised that you are unaware of any authority, which holds a municipality is not allowed to expend public funds to support or oppose the passage of a proposed
income tax/levy. However, I am happy to bring some of the relevant sections of the Ohio Revised Code to your attention.
- R.C. §9.03(C) in part states, “no governing body of a political subdivision shall use public funds to … (e) support or oppose the … passage of a levy or bond issue.”
- R.C. §9.03(C)(2) expressly prohibits the use of public funds to compensate city employees for time spent on any activity to influence the outcome of an election, which includes supporting or opposing the passage of a levy.
- R.C. §9.03(C)(1)(e) has been interpreted by the Ohio Attorney General to preclude a municipality from using its website to support or oppose the passage of an income tax increase/levy.
In the instant matter, the Mayor’s expenditure of $49,700 on an advertising campaign to promote the passage of Issue 3; the Mayor’s use of City service department workers to put up signs throughout Macedonia that advocate for the passage of Issue 3; and the City posting, on its website, that it is critical to pass Issue 3 are, in my opinion, in violation of R.C. §9.03, which sets clear parameters for the expenditure of public funds.
Next, I am not taking issue with Mayor Migliorini’s constitutionally protected First Amendment Rights. I fully support the Mayor’s right to advocate for or against a particular issue on his own time and without expending City resources. Also, I shall never personally criticize the Mayor or any City employee for taking a position on a matter that is contrary to mine. I am simply taking issue with Mayor Migliorini expending public resources (e.g., time at City Council meetings, spending $49,700 on an advertising campaign, using City employees to put up signs throughout town, posting on the City website) to advocate for the passage of Issue 3.
Next, as you know or should know R.C. §5705.41(B) incorporates R.C. §733.13, R.C. §705.18, and R.C. § 705.19 in support of the premise that money shall not be drawn from the treasury of city except in pursuance of appropriations made by the legislative authority. Here, my review of the minutes of City Council meetings for the past six months does not show Macedonia City Council passed any ordinance that would allow Mayor Migliorini to expend $49,700 from public funds in support of the passage of Issue 3. If I am mistaken, kindly bring to my attention the Council appropriation, which allocated $49,700 the from the Administrative/Finance budget for the passage of Issue 3.
Next, the comments in your letter concerning the Farnhurst matter are not relevant to the issues raised in my letter concerning the Mayor’s illegal expenditure of public funds. However, be assured that since you have once again, mischaracterized the events surrounding the Farnhurst litigation in your letter, I will address those falsehoods with a detailed response via a separate letter. From the Macedonia taxpayer perspective, the relevant point is that my Farnhurst clients agreed to settle the entire matter in December 2013, in consideration of the City of Macedonia paying them $60,000 for foregoing the building of a home on a lot the City had properly divided, and the release of a building permit for the construction of a single family home on the remaining lot.
Joseph Diemert and Joseph Migliorini declined to settle the matter at that time with minimal cost to Macedonia taxpayers. Instead, they decided to pursue a strategy that caused the expenditure of approximately $300,000 of public funds in defending a private property dispute for Mr. Migliorini. This strategy resulted in a final settlement that in my opinion, still exposes the City to liability, did not resolve critical issues, and did not result in the recovery of any of the legal costs engendered.
In closing, you are entitled to characterize the Farnhurst, LLC lawsuit as a baseless claim. However, that right does not detract from your professional responsibilities owed to the City of Macedonia and its residents. Simply put, in my opinion, your duty is to gather and forward information regarding the Mayor’s expenditure to the State Auditor and Treasurer.
Regardless, kindly please gather the materials requested in the attached public records request so that if you decline to take the appropriate measures, I can do so on behalf of our Macedonia taxpayers. I remain,
Very truly yours,
Jorge Luis Pla
Resident, City of Macedonia
cc: Mayor Joseph Migliorini (via email)
All Members of City Council
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST
1. A copy of meeting minutes of City Council or City Council’s authorized agent(s) regarding expending public funds for Issue 3; and
2. A copy of the appropriation bill passed by City Council that authorized Mayor Migliorini to expend $49,700 in public funds for Issue 3; and
3. A copy of the purchase order(s) issued by the City of Macedonia to an individual, vendor, contractor, and/or company performing work or preparing materials for Issue 3; and
4. A copy of receipts the City of Macedonia received from an individual, vendor, contractor, and/or company that performed work or prepared materials for Issue 3; and
5. A copy of the contract(s) entered into by and between the City of Macedonia and an individual, vendor, contractor, and/or company regarding performing work or preparing materials for Issue 3; and
6. A copy of all drafts negotiated by the City on behalf of an individual, vendor, contractor, and/or company who performed work for the City of Macedonia on Issue 3; and
7. A list of all City employees and the amount of time they spent putting up signs around the City for Issue 3; and
8. An example of each product produced by an individual, vendor, contractor, and/or company for Issue 3.
