Auditor Again Refuses Juvenile/Probate Court Expenses

July 14, 2020 by Amy Patterson

Geauga County Auditor Chuck Walder is once again refusing requests for payment to vendors county Juvenile Probate Court Judge Tim Grendell has made, according to a series of letters obtained by the Geauga County Maple Leaf.

At issue are payments for a March robocall and newspaper ads in April — expenses Grendell said were COVID-related and within his statutory authority to order.

In April, Grendell’s court submitted vouchers to Walder’s office to pay TRZ Business Services, Inc., of Akron, for coronavirus-related robocalls, made on March 12, 2020, totaling $2,450.88 from public funds.

Two other vouchers were for a $910 display ad in the Chagrin Valley Times and an $802 ad in the Geauga County Maple Leaf.

Walder, in letters dated April 24 and May 24, said all three ads included language misleading to the public.

“Pursuant to our office’s request for additional evidentiary matter supporting payment, on April 14, 2020, the court submitted the recording used in the March 12, 2020 robocalls,” Walder wrote. “The recording was 1:48 long and featured Judge Timothy Grendell’s voice. At the end of the recording, Judge Grendell explicitly stated: ‘This is Judge Tim Grendell. No tax dollars were used for this call, (then repeated) no tax dollars were used for this call.’”

The newspaper ads also included disclaimers stating: “Judge Timothy J. Grendell is offering free online Good Deeds Programs. Call Cheryl to reserve your spot or to request a free DVD … No tax dollars were used to pay for this advertisement.”

Walder told Grendell statements that no tax dollars were used to make the ads and multiple references to free things contradict his later submitting them for payment using public funds.

“If paid through the Geauga County Treasury, the statement’s specific language would promote and create a public misrepresentation,” Walder said. “If the auditor’s office were to approve this expenditure using public funds, we would be complicit in knowingly perpetrating multiple misrepresentations to the public about the expenditure.”

Walder said the payments are Grendell’s personal responsibility and not the county’s.

Grendell’s conduct, he added, violates both law and public policy.

“And (Grendell’s conduct) curiously comes during his active campaigning for public office with increased public criticism for using county resources for self-promotion,” Walder added.

Grendell responded July 2 with a letter to Geauga County Prosecutor Jim Flaiz requesting the appointment of outside counsel to represent his office in legal action against the auditor.

“Enough is enough,” Grendell’s letter opened. “For approximately two years, County Auditor Charles Walder has repeatedly improperly withheld or delayed payments of court approved funding orders.”

Grendell said his office’s “countless attempts to educate Auditor Walder on these constitutional realities have been futile,” as have court-initiated attempts to mediate disagreements.

Grendell also said Walder refused a mediation offer made personally by State Auditor Keith Faber and Walder’s breach of contract with the court’s vendors is not covered by the state’s legal insurance through the County Risk-Sharing Association. Grendell added Walder’s actions will result in direct legal costs to county taxpayers and can only be rectified through court action.

In his own letter to Flaiz, however, Walder said his office voluntarily and successfully engaged the Ohio Supreme Court Government Conflict Resolution Services in April 2019, at no cost to the county, and is currently mediating a solution to the unpaid vouchers at issue.

In his three-page letter, Grendell did not address Walder’s accusations of misrepresentation in his advertisements. He focused on his interpretation of the court’s independence from the auditor’s oversight.

Grendell called Walder’s refusal to pay the vouchers — some of which are already collecting late fees — a “direct assault on the court’s inherent authority to determine its funding needs.”

Walder hit back, pointing out a recent Ohio Attorney General opinion which held a county auditor is empowered to question the validity of a payment, even if it is within an available appropriation and a proper order or voucher with evidentiary support has been presented.

Walder also quoted from a recent Ohio Supreme Court Slip Opinion, which said the inherent power of a court does not allow a judge to sidestep an otherwise constitutional statutory process, emphasizing the Supreme Court’s statement that the American system’s checks and balances are a basic elementary-school lesson.

Walder said his experience for the last two years has shown the juvenile probate court believes separation of powers permits sidestepping of Ohio Revised Code.

“Normal evidentiary material provided by every other county entity appears to the juvenile probate court as ‘overreaching and unreasonable,’” Walder said. “Nonetheless, the legislature has placed the authority to require such material in my hands.”