Chester Township to Fight Grendell’s Court Order
My position is, if this board is interested in protecting the interests of Chester Township residents, we should file an appeal. KenRadtke
Editor’s Note: On Monday, the court denied trustees’ request to stay enforcement of its Nov. 26 order pending appeal and ordered the township to pay the cost of a 7 a.m. hearing Monday on the motion. In denying the township’s motion, Judge Grendell ruled a stay of his order requiring the master commissioner to “facilitate funding” for the township park district in 2015 would cause “irreparable harm to the park board and the operation of the park district.”
Chester Township Trustees unanimously agreed to file a formal appeal of Probate Court Judge Tim Grendell’s Nov. 26 judgment entry ordering the township to provide adequate funding for the township’s park board.
Although the township’s park district was formed in 1984 by Probate Judge Frank Lavrich as a Chapter 1545 entity under the Ohio Revised Code, and as such has the authority to tax township residents up to 0.5 mills, a previous board of township trustees about a decade ago began treating the district as the other distinction allowed under the ORC — a 511 organization, which is dependent on trustees for its funding.
For the past several years, trustees and parks board members have clashed repeatedly over funding and questions of authority. In May, Grendell appointed former Appeals Judge Mary Jane Trapp as a master commissioner to study the park board situation.
Trapp issued her report to Grendell in a public court session held in August at the Chester Township Fire Station.
In an eight-page judgment entry on Nov. 26, Grendell ordered trustees to make sure the park district has adequate funding, and that the park district take steps to make sure it has “dedicated independent funds” every year, beginning in 2016.
Park Commissioner Lance Yandell told the Chesterland News last week the park board is likely to approve a 0.3 levy — less than their permitted half mill, which would provide about $104,000 a year to the parks.
Grendell’s judgment entry also or-dered trustees and park board members to meet with Trapp and finalize the park district’s funding for 2015.
But Thursday night, trustees unanimously decided to file a formal appeal of Grendell’s ruling.
“We had a meeting last Thursday with our legal counsel,” Trustee Ken Radtke said. “My position is, if this board is interested in protecting the interests of Chester Township residents, we should file an appeal.”
“Yes” a woman in the audience exclaimed.
“I’m in complete agreement,” Trustee Bud Kinney said.
The vote was unanimous, and trustees also approved spending $150 for a filing fee with the Geauga County Clerk of Courts.
Radtke said he had drafted a letter to the park district, and asked Kinney and Trustee Mike Petruziello to help him create a final draft.
The letter informed the park officials that trustees were filing an appeal, had approved giving the board $75,000 in July, and had received no further financial requests from them.
“In the spirit of cooperation, we’d like to hold a joint public meeting to discuss the park district’s 2015 funding before the end of the year,” Radtke read from his draft.
Kinney said the letter should include several options for meeting dates.
After checking their calendars, trustees concluded their preferred date would be Dec. 23, but they could also meet on Dec. 18, 22 or 29.
“Are you not asking your legal department to negate the judgment entry, then asking the park board to cooperate on things that could be negated (in the appeal)?” asked Margaret Muehling, chairwoman of the Chester?Township Zoning Board.?”It’sn’t that kind of putting the cart before the horse?”
Radtke said he could not discuss any specifics of the pending appeal.
“We need to be planning the 2015 budget and we’re really behind on it,” Kinney said.
Petruziello said trustees had asked to meet with the park board in August.
“But the judge kiboshed that,” he added. “So we’re gonna put out the olive branch again.”
Petruziello said that, because trustees are questioning whether the park board is a 511 board or a 1545 district under the ORC, Radtke’s letter should not contain any references to “park district.”
“The park board doesn’t own land; I can’t see that it’s a district,” Petruziello said. “I’d like not to have the word ‘district’ in it. It’s a park board.”
Radtke then read from the letter’s draft, “Although we’ve asked our legal counsel to file an appeal, we’d like to meet with you and resolve the issues as stated in the Master Commissioner’s report.”
After Petruziello objected to the letter referring to the report, Radtke agreed to remove the reference and keep the part about the budget.
Radtke said he would ask the administrative assistant Friday morning to type the final draft.
“Then you guys can sign it and get it out,” Radtke said.
