Supreme Court Halts Chester Trustees, Park District Proceedings
No provision of (Ohio Revised Code) Chapter 1545 gives any power to a probate court to issue an order to 'adequately fund' a park district. Attorney Todd Raskin
The Ohio Supreme Court has ordered Geauga County Probate Court Judge Tim Grendell to stop all proceedings in the ongoing dispute between Chester Township Trustees and the township park district until it decides whether Grendell is overstepping his authority.
During an April 28 status conference, Grendell told township trustees they had until May 8 to convince him they should not be responsible for 100 percent of Master Commissioner Mary Jane Trapp’s fees.
According to probate court records, Trapp’s fees as of April 25 totaled nearly $36,720.
The court had appointed Trapp as a master commissioner last year to investigate various issues raised in a 28-page anonymous report, titled “Chester Township Park District 2013 Review.” The document highlighted areas of concern regarding the park district’s operations and procedures.
Previously, in a Nov. 26, 2014, order accepting and adopting Trapp’s 252-page report, Grendell ordered the township and park district to cover 75 percent of the master commissioner’s costs.
Grendell said Tuesday that he and the probate court have followed Ohio law with respect to the Chester park district.
“Six judges have ruled favorably; four have not,” he said.
“Someone has to pay for the master commissioner who helped bring the park district into compliance,” the judge added. “Either Chester Township or the Chester Township Park District, or both, have to pay the cost for those proceedings.”
Grendell’s April 28 pronouncement came after trustees’ attorney, Todd Raskin, told the judge his clients would not meet with Trapp, as directed in the Nov. 26 order, to ensure the park district is adequately funded.
Similarly, Raskin said they would not meet with her to address any apparent conflict in a 1993 agreement between trustees and park commissioners, and the 1984 probate court order the late Judge Frank Lavrich issued creating the park district at the township’s request.
“In this case, the probate court has made itself the arbiter of ‘adequate’ and improperly assumed jurisdiction over the . . . Chester Township Trustees’ funding and resources, which are now forced to be expended by attending court conferences and responding to meetings with the master commissioner on a funding issue that the probate court has no jurisdiction over,” Raskin wrote in trustees’ second request to halt proceedings filed with the supreme court on May 8.
On April 15, trustees Mike Petruziello, Ken Radtke and Bud Kinney filed an initial complaint in the Ohio Supreme Court seeking to prohibit Grendell from exercising jurisdiction over them and vacating his earlier orders.
“No provision of (Ohio Revised Code) Chapter 1545 gives any power to a probate court to issue an order to ‘adequately fund’ a park district,” he argued in the May 8 motion.
As a result of Grendell’s ongoing efforts to exercise authority over the township/trustees, Raskin asked the Ohio Supreme Court to “bring to a stop the probate court’s efforts to exercise jurisdiction it does not have and allow the issue to be reviewed in this neutral forum.”
In addition, Raskin said Grendell could not force on trustees “the payment of the fees of a master commissioner to examine the conduct of the park district commissioners, which the probate court itself appointed.”
“The probate court is a court of limited and special jurisdiction and under R.C. 1545 it has no authority to impose fees on the township trustees,” he wrote, adding the probate court case that created the park district in 1984 was closed.
Raskin did concede, however, that the probate court has filed its orders appointing or removed park commissioners over the past 30 years in the case folder.
Both Raskin and attorney Jim Gillette, who represents the park district, declined to comment on the supreme court’s May 12 ruling.
Following the April 28 status conference, Grendell also instructed Trapp to “review and investigate” the status of 2015 park district funding and whether any current conflict exists between the trustees-park district 1993 agreement and Lavrich’s 1984 order.
In her report filed May 12, Trapp said Raskin declined to meet with her to discuss the funding issue and the agreement.
She did note, however, the park district had an unencumbered cash balance of $4,862, as of Jan. 1, 2015, and already had received $47,570 out of an expected $75,000 in funding from the township.
On the issue of the 1993 agreement, Trapp told Grendell she could not address the matter because of trustees’ unwillingness to meet with her and the park commissioners.
She added she was prepared to “review the issue and make recommendations without the input of both stakeholders,” if the court instructed her to move forward.
