Legal complaints still pending against Bellbrook schools
School officials trying to limit Stafford’s public comments in cases.
A Sugarcreek Twp. resident’s two legal challenges against Bellbrook-Sugarcreek Schools stemming from the 2019 levy campaign are still in progress.
In September, John Stafford, who has opposed two recent school levies, sued the school board in Greene County Common Pleas Court alleging violations of Ohio’s open meetings law. There have been numerous filings by both sides as well as an attempt at mediation, but the case is still pending, with the possibility of a trial in late 2020.
Stafford also filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission alleging that the political action committee supporting the district’s 2019 levy had improper involvement and funding from school district employees, including Superintendent Doug Cozad. The Elections Commission declined the schools’ request to dismiss that complaint, and it is set for a hearing April 30.
The cases are active as voters are again considering a levy request from the school district. Voting will conclude March 17.
In both cases, school officials filed for protective orders trying to limit Stafford’s public comments as well as his ability to release
the content of depositions and materials obtained in the court discovery process.
In the Elections Commission complaint, the commission denied the request for the protective order, stating Stafford has constitutional rights to comment publicly. Cozad has appealed the commission’s ruling in Franklin County Common Pleas Court, and the Ohio Attorney General’s office, representing the Elections Commission, has moved to dismiss the schools’ appeal.
In the lawsuit, a Greene County magistrate ruled Thursday that depositions and court discovery materials may not be disseminated by either side, but that Stafford is not prohibited from making other public comments on the case.
Open meetings case
In the Common Pleas Court case, Stafford made two primary claims. The first was that the school board used group text messages, emails and social media communications to hold “secret meetings” to deliberate on district business, which would be in violation of Ohio open meetings law.
He cited at least a dozen instances from messages he acquired via public records law. Stafford’s attorney, Derek Clinger, said they show school board members privately discussing how to respond to criticism of the May 2019 levy.
Nick Subashi, the attorney for the school board, said that the board’s messages were of a fact-finding nature, not deliberations on what action to take, and therefore not a violation of the state’s Open Record laws.
Stafford’s second claim in the Greene County lawsuit is that the board went into closed executive sessions improperly nine times in 2018 and 2019, citing a need to discuss the superintendent’s evaluation, or district property, or personnel issues, among other things.
The school board responded to the suit in a Nov. 20 answer, saying it would “agree to injunctive relief ” on three of the claims, tied to meetings that occurred in late 2018.
Clinger said that is an admission of guilt. Subashi said Thursday that the board does not believe the subject matter of those executive sessions was improper, but he said the board did not follow the letter of the law.
“The Board used the words, I move that we go into executive session for ‘the evaluation of the treasurer’ instead of saying ‘to consider the compensation or employment of a board employee,’ ” Subashi said. “Our position is that we have a couple of technical, very insignificant, tacky-tacky violations of open meetings law.”
Clinger opposed that view, saying, “Requiring the government to follow the law isn’t a ‘ticky-tack’ issue.”
Elections Commission case
Clinger said Stafford’s Elections Commission case accuses the Citizens for Bellbrook Schools political action committee of failing to disclose “in-kind contributions” from the district that promoted passage of the 2019 levy. Voters rejected that levy.
Clinger said the district used public funds to send out PAC materials, specifically one postcard mailing. He claimed the district paid multiple employees for doing PAC levy work during the work day.
Ohio law says school districts can send out basic informational material about a levy, but that anything advocating a “yes” vote can’t be paid for with public money. Subashi said Thursday the school board never spent any public funds to support the levy.
He said allegations that Cozad was paid for working to pass the levy were “absolute nonsense.” He said Cozad is a non-exempt employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act. He doesn’t punch a time clock and can work on the levy too as long as his superintendent duties get done, Subashi said.
Clinger did not comment on those claims from Subashi, saying the Ohio Elections Commission would decide what was required to be reported.
“These cases are about government transparency and accountability,” Clinger said. “The public is harmed when the government does not follow the law.”
Neither legal case is expected to be settled before voters cast their ballots March 17 on a 5.7-mill additional levy to raise money for Bellbrook-Sugarcreek schools.