Councilman Mintz,
I am addressing this email to you because I just read in the minutes from the August 18th Council meeting that you are against the video taping of Council meetings in order to make them available and easily accessible to residents on the City website.
Your reasoning was that "there are people looking to destroy the Mayor, City Council and the administration" and if the public was able to view the video of these open public meetings, there is a possibility that they could edit snipets together to misrepresent what was said. This might be one of the weakest excuses I have ever heard.
To support your position against video taping meetings you said that you have, "spoken to a few of the communities that have videotaped or live streamed their meetings and they are regretting their decision". Instead of making a broad unspecific statement can you list which public officials you spoke with that told you this? It is troubling that a sitting Councilmember like yourself or any other government official would have any issue with giving the public access to the videos of public meetings.
Please don't tell me it is a cost issue. I just found out that last year the Mayor gave David Pfaff, the City's Finance Director a $5,200 a year "car allowance". This would be acceptable if Mr. Pfaff had a history of turning in a lot of mileage reimbursements. However, in the two years before he received a $5200 annual car allowance, he averaged less than $315 in mileage reimbursements annually.
Mr. Pfaff is already the highest paid Finance Director in the region. If the City is able to give someone a $5,200 annual "car allowance" who only averaged $315 a year in mileage reimbursements, I think they can find the money to videotape council meetings and make them easily accessible to the public.
In the minutes from this August 18th Council meeting, Mayor Gorden stated that "the City is very transparent".
How can the Mayor claim "the City is very transparent" when he has never given an explanation to the media or the public as to how it was legal for him to cash in 100% of all his allotted vacation hours, every year for almost a decade in order to get an extra $17k a year. The Mayor has admitted that he took time off during that period and as an example, he didn't use a single hour of his allotted vacation time in the year when he last visited his daughter in California.
On the issue of transparency, can someone explain why the City will not fulfill the public records request I made for the 2014 budget report the City is required to submit to City Council by June 15th of every year. The specific requirements of this document are detailed in Article IV, Section 5 of the City Charter.
Either this document exists and they are refusing to provide it or it doesn't exist even thought the Charter requires it. Both of these options are unacceptable and if this document truly doesn't exist, The Mayor, City Council, and the Finance and Law Directors needs to explain why.
This document contains very important information and I don't think there a single Council member concerned that they haven't received it? This is disturbing since 2014 will be the first year the City realizes the lost revenue from the repeal of the estate tax which they previous received over $3m a year from. Also, we learned in 2013 that many companies with hundreds of employees would be leaving Beachwood and with it the income tax revenue they generated.
Is there a single Council Member who is interested in learning how the City is going to adjust their spending to account for this loss of revenue. When looking at the lasted budget report from 2013 which it posted online, it seems the Mayor's strategy to make the budget look good is to either add debt or push off street reconstruction and resurfacing. Here are some concerning statistics;
- Last year the City spent only $150,000 on road repairs despite averaging $2.8m in spending for this during the previous five years. (However, they spent $250k to make sure City Hall had heated
sidewalks) - As for debt, from 2003 to the end of 2012 the City's debt from general obligation bonds went from $3,715,000 to $18,680,266 in that period. This is more than a 5x increase in a decade. Then you add in that as part of the deal the Mayor stuck during the Eaton relocation, the City is also responsible for the $22m in bonds floated by the Cuyahoga County Port Authority for the purchase of the Eaton land. Because of this, Beachwood’s debt and other obligations went from under $4m in 2003 to more than $40m at the end of 2012. This is a 10x increase in only a decade. (We don't know the City's debt and obligations at the end of 2013. They would be included in the 2014 budget document I requested but we are told doesn't exist)
Beyond detailed projections for 2014, the budget document I was told doesn't exist is also required to contain the final financial position as of Jan. 1, 2013. If this document doesn't exist, how can Council make informed decisions and do their job effectively? How can they determine if the City is in the position to add $8m in debt for a new Fire Station if they don't know the amount of debt and other obligations the City has as well as its cash position? This would be like deciding to buy a million dollar house without understanding your financial position to determine if you can afford it.
It is troubling on its own that a important document required by the City Charter doesn't exist. However, it is even more disturbing that Council doesn't seems to care that they weren't given this information. Considering the City's rising debt and obligations, the recent practice of delaying road and infrastructure maintenance, and the loss of revenue from the Estate Tax, every Councilmember should be very interested in seeing this budget document to understand the City's current financial position and how they plan to deal with these issues. Sadly it seems that no one on Council even noticed they never received this document until my email last Friday.
Mr. Mintz, the Mayor likes to make public claims about how transparent the City is but his actions and Council's show a very different reality. Your resistance to making videos of open public meetings easily accessible and the City not providing this required document are perfect examples.
In the minutes from Aug. 18th Council meeting, Mayor Gorden, Mr. Goodman and Mr. Wachter stated something to the effect that they and other Council Members respond to residents questions and concerns either by email, telephone call or face to face. If that is a true statement, why is it that I have received over a dozen replies from people blind copied on the email I sent last week but not a single Councilmember or City Official responded? Please discontinue these grand declarations when they are clearly empty and disingenuous statements.
The following are the concerns put forward in this email. I will be interested to see if any Councilmember or City Official replies to this email to address them;
- Please explain how the 2014 budget document which Article IV, Section 5 of the City Charter demands must be submitted to Council by June 15th doesn't currently exist? When can we expect this document to be produced?
- Please explain how can a Councilmember can do their job effectively without this information?
- Please explain why the Mayor authorized a $5,200 annual "Car Allowance" to Finance Director David Pfaff when in the two years prior to receiving this stipend, he averaged less than $315 a year in mileage reimbursements.
- Please explain how it is legal for the Mayor to take time off without using his vacation hours so he can cash them all in as "unused" to get an extra $17k a year? How was the Mayor able to visit his daughter in California while not using a single hour of his allotted vacation time that year?
All of these are reasonable concerns that should be addressed. If the City is as transparent as the Mayor claims it is and Council responds to individuals concerns, one would expect at least some of you to respond to this email.
Thank you and I hope and expect to see replies from some or all of you addressing these very issues.
Mary Williams
[email protected]
The following is the reply from Brian Reali, the Beachwood Law Director.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Mr. Reali,
Thank you for your response and I cut and pasted it below my signature so
everyone on this email chain can see how flawed, indefensible and illogical your
position is. I CC'd people in Ohio Auditor's Office as your email seems to
communicate that they agree with your position.
Correct me if I am misunderstanding anything that you wrote in your email
reply.
First of all, I never asserted that the non existence of this document was
something that violated State or County Law. My emails have been very
clear that the production of this document is required by Article IV, Section 5
of the City Charter.
What the State and Country are asking for is very different from what
Article IV, Section 5 of the City Charter demands. Compliance with
one doesn't cancel out the other. You have to do both and it is not an
option or a choice. It seems you are trying to say that a
specific requirement set forth in the City Charter is merely optional as long as
the State or County law doesn't require it? Is this
really the position of the Beachwood Law Director?
You wrote that State Laws supersedes local charters. No one is
suggesting that anything is superseded by anything. What the State
requires is very different from what the City Charter requires. These
requirements are not in conflict with each other and you
can't treat a requirements of the City Charter as optional simply
because you have satisfied the State's demands.
You also wrote that this document was produced in previous years for
consideration in the awarding of the “Distinguished Budget Presentation
Award” and that since "the City of Beachwood has no current intention of
applying for this award, therefore, nothing necessitates the creating of
this report". Is this a joke? Article IV, Section 5 of
the City Charter clearly necessitates the "creating of this
report".
Please re read this section of the Charter (the link is listed
below). You will not find anything in this section that says the
production of this document is optional since it isn't required by State Law
nor will you find anything in this section that states the document is
only required if the City is trying to get some sort of award.
You wrote, "the information requested by the Charter in Article V,
Section 5, and other information requested by Council, is in fact provided to
Council through the course of the fiscal year. Note, the charter does not
indicate reports are to be made all at once, or that they are even required to
be reduced to a written document." Have you read the Charter?
You are the Law Director and in that position you need to have a much
better grasp of the City Charter.
You are correct that it doesn't say all the information must be provided to
council all at once. However, it specifically says it must be given to
them, "On or before the fifteenth day of June of the current fiscal
year".
As for your statement that Article IV, Section 5 doesn't require the
information to be reduced to a written document, it seems you are suggesting all
of this information was given to council orally? This is such an
absurd position.
First of all, the discussions about the City budget projections do not fit
into any of the exemptions of the Sunshine Laws which would allow this issue to
be discussed in a closed executive session. If this was communicated
orally to Council, there would be a record of this in the City Council
minutes. I looked through all the minutes of all Council
Meetings and no where in any of these Council meetings was Council given the
information required in Article IV, Section 5 orally.
Secondly, here is the link to Article IV of the City Charter (http://whdrane.conwaygreene.com/NXT/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=whdrane:OHBeachwood).
If you scroll down to the bottom you can read Section 5 in its entirety. As you
will see it demands a tremendous amount of data and information. In fact,
until this year, the City produced this document and it is usually around 119
pages. Are you trying to suggest that all of this information was provided
to council without being, "reduced to a written
document" like you wrote?
This email serves as an official public records request for you to provide
the following:
- Any and all documentation you are relying on to support
your position that specific requirements in the City Charter are optional
as long as State or County laws are not violated.
- Any and all documentation you are relying on to support
your position that the specific requirements set forth in Article IV,
Section 5 of the City Charter are only required if the City
is hoping to be considered for the “Distinguished Budget Presentation
Award”.
Your email response is a perfect example of all that is wrong with the way
the City of Beachwood operates. Perhaps your legal abilities are
so poor that you actually believe the excuse you provided in this email.
However, I see this as very unlikely as I can't imagine you could have gotten
through law school. Instead of advising the Mayor that a mistake was
made, you believe your job is to do whatever the Mayor and Council ask you
to do instead of providing competent legal advice.
The position in your email reply is illogical and indefensible.
However, this is a pattern of behavior. It seems the Mayor believes that
he and the City don't have to follow the law but their actions
instantly become legal as long as he can get the Law Director and
Finance Director to write a memo saying it is so.
Unfortunately, that is not how the law works.
You are the Law Director. Please start doing your job better.
Mary Williams
[email protected]
Below is the email I received a short while ago from Mr. Reali where he
gave these indefensible responses.
=========================
From: [email protected]
To:
[email protected]
CC: [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: Public Records Request
Date: Thu,
4 Sep 2014 17:56:47 +0000
I am in receipt of your email dated August 29, 2014 as addressed to Mr.
Wachter, and copied to Beachwood City Council and certain members of the
Beachwood administration. Please let this email serve as yet another reply
to your request for the “budget report” (sent August 25, 2014) as well as
clarification of some inaccuracies set forth in your email. First, with
regards to the “budget report,” that document was previously created in relation
to the Government Finance Officers’ Association for consideration in the
awarding of the “Distinguished Budget Presentation Award.” That
report was not created this year. At this time, the City of Beachwood has
no current intention of applying for this award, therefore, nothing necessitates
the creating of this report. Perhaps most germane to your public records
request and per Ohio public records law, the City of Beachwood is not required
to create said report.
Regarding your comments relative to the processes or products associated
with the Beachwood alternative tax budget, please be advised that under state
law, Cuyahoga County was authorized, and did adopt the alternative tax budget
process for local municipalities. The authority to adopt this process, and to
require Beachwood to follow this process flows from the general laws of the
State of Ohio. These general laws, supersedes local charters. The current
charter provisions in Beachwood are more akin to the budget process pre-2003. It
was at that time state law changed, and the county chose to proceed with the
alternative budget procedure.
Notwithstanding the alternative tax budget process, the information
requested by the Charter in Article V, Section 5, and other information
requested by Council, is in fact provided to Council through the course of the
fiscal year. Note, the charter does not indicate reports are to be made all at
once, or that they are even required to be reduced to a written document.
As I am sure you are aware, the Auditor of the State of Ohio reviews and
tests fiscal processes in Beachwood, including the budgetary processes for legal
compliance on the part of Beachwood. The auditor’s office, dating back to
at least 1999, has not found any issues of improprieties or non-compliance
with the budgetary process regarding the City of Beachwood. In fact, the City of
Beachwood has consistently enjoyed state audits, that to say the least, are
outstanding.
Respectfully,
Brian
Brian A. Reali
Law Director-City of Beachwood, Ohio
(216) 595-5462
But, in a
larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow
-- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have
consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will
little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what
they did here.
-President Lincoln at Gettysburg, November 19, 1863