Letters to the Editor
False Conclusion
I understand a correction will be made in this issue regarding the Jan. 7 article entitled “Grendell Tells Commissioners Legal Fee Payment is Resolved” and I am writing to provide additional clarification.
The very first sentence stated “Judge Tim Grendell informed Geauga County Commissioners his court will pay legal fees of about $9,000 … ”
The reality is that we were already trying to pay that fee through the Court, just as we do with our other bills. The process is this:
1) The Court enters a payment into the Auditor’s accounting system and submits paper invoices to the Auditor for payment, just like everyone else in the county;
2) The Auditor’s office reviews everything;
3) The Auditor’s office submits them to the Commissioners for approval;
4) Commissioners approve; and
5) Auditor’s office prints and mails checks to the vendors.
This particular invoice was delayed by the Commissioners as they had some questions before approving it, and it was held for their following meeting. At that following meeting they delayed it again as they still had some questions (at no time, however, did they or the Auditor contact the Court for answers to their questions).
After that second delay, the Judge had a conversation with the attorney, and the firm, out of respect for Judge Grendell and the Court, very generously offered to waive the $9,264 fee, saving the county that expense. The Judge then wrote a letter to notify the Commissioners that the matter had been resolved and there was no further action required by the Commissioners.
This should have been good news. However it seems everyone, the Commissioners, and even your publication, assumed that meant that the Court somehow magically paid for the expense without going through the Auditor’s and Commissioners’ approval process. The Commissioners also responded very mean-spiritedly in a letter back to the Judge, and as your article stated, drew a false conclusion that this must have meant that the Judge “realized” it wasn’t a legitimate expense, even though receiving counsel regarding the Probate Court Judge’s own authority regarding park district matters is very clearly a legitimate Court expense.
The Court appreciates that your publication has offered a correction to the original article, and I am offering again, as I have before, to provide any information that I can to help you fact check articles about the Court prior to printing, as I’m sure we can agree that providing accurate information initially would best serve the residents of Geauga County.
Sub
