Chardon sues county

Lawsuit filed over office move; county prosecutor calls action frivolous

Chardon leaders are taking another step in their efforts to keep certain Geauga County offices in the city.

A lawsuit was filed Oct. 15 in Geauga County Common Pleas Court versus the county and county commissioners seeking resolution to the dispute. The case has been assigned to Judge David M. Ondrey.

The lawsuit states that the city is entitled to a declaration that the usual office of the county commissioners must be maintained at the county seat (Chardon), including:

• The three commissioners’ offices and all of their staff

• The county administrator’s offices and his staff

• The offices of all operation departments/

offices/staff comprising those of budget and management, human resources, procurement, communications, information technology, risk-management, records management and maintenance

• Other customary offices of the commissioners, including economic development

The city also seeks a ruling that the offices of all boards and commissions on which the commissioners, county auditor, county treasurer, county recorder — or any of their designees — serve by statute must be maintained at the county seat, including the placement of all operations and staff that service such boards and commissions.

In addition, Chardon leaders want a declaration that the county archives, including all operations and staff, must be maintained at the county seat.

The city also is requesting injunctive relief ordering the defendants to comply with the court’s declarations and enjoining them from acting in a contrary fashion. The plaintiff ’s costs and attorney’s fees are sought as well.

City Council on Sept. 3 had requested in writing that commissioners commit to maintaining a fully staffed and operating office “performing real governmental functions” in Chardon, and to specify what departments will be located there or what functions will be performed after a new county office building is constructed in

Claridon Township.

C ount y Prosecutor James R. Flaiz called the potential for such legal action by the city frivolous, in a Sept. 16 letter to city-retained attorney Majeed G. Makhlouf.

“The Board of Commissioners is under no obligation to provide the City of Chardon any written commitment regarding the office of the commissioners,” it reads. “It has been stated time and time again … that the usual office of the County Commissioners will remain in the county seat in accordance with the Ohio Revised Code. The Board of Commissioners is well-acquainted with the law regarding this matter, having been advised by the office.

“The County has communicated to the City on a number of occasions that the office of the Commissioners can remain in their current location until the county disposes of the 470 Center St. property. So long as the Commissioners are maintaining their usual office in the county seat, there is no controversy to be decided by the courts.”

A news release from the city, issued the same day the lawsuit was filed, indicates that Chardon officials had no other option.

“W hile the Commissioners have refused to provide the City with any clarity, the City has discovered through public-records requests that plans for the new facility show the County Commissioners’ offices in the drawing being located outside of the County Seat,” the release says. “This is contrary to previous statements made in press releases and communications to the city. ...

“The City would have preferred to avoid a legal battle with Commissioners, but must protect its citizens’ rights. It cannot afford to wait until after the Commissioners have created facts on the ground and then try to undo the harm after it has taken place. The negative impact to the business community and the overall economic vitality of the City cannot be ignored.”

Flaiz said the county has spent significant money and time to bring services closer to the center of the county for the convenience of citizens, and any delays will “likely result in the county suffering a financial loss.”

“The Board of Commissioners has authorized this office to pursue the City for any financial losses related to this type of obstruction,” he said.

He noted that the ORC allows commissioners to, by resolution, agree to hold their regular and special meetings outside the county seat.

“That is why space has been allocated in the new building for the commis

sioners,” he said.

Flaiz acknowledged the city’s concern about loss of income tax revenue.

“The commissioners represent all of Geauga County,” he said.

In addition, Chardon leaders want a declaration that the county archives, including all operations and staff, must be maintained at the county seat.

The history

The original schedule for the proposed $30 million, 103,000-square-foot county office building indicated that site grading and earthwork would begin this past June. However, the project was slowed by the pandemic. Occupancy wasn’t expected until early 2022.

Commissioners seek to move service-oriented offices to 12611 Ravenwood Drive in Claridon. The Department on Aging, Job and Family Services, adult services, Health Department and veterans services would be housed in one building, for example.

Commissioners have said they intend to complete the project without raising taxes.

A number of scenarios were investigated by county leaders, including renovating existing offices, building on 35 acres on South Street in Chardon and potentially redeveloping property on Chardon Square. That option was reviewed at the urging of Chardon officials, concerned about losing income tax revenue and traffic for local businesses.

In January, Chardon leaders retained an attorney to send a letter to Geauga County Prosecutor Jim Flaiz protesting perceived plans to relocate the county commissioners’ offices from the county seat.

However, in April he said he had a “very productive meeting” with legal counsel for the city.