Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
v. :
STEWARD GIBBONEY :
111 N. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43215 :
and :
CLYDE E. HENRY :
111 N. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43215 :
and :
JOSEPH M . MCCABE :
111 N. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43215 :
and :
DANIEL M. MORGAN :
111 N. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43215 :
and :
ERIN PROSSER :
111 N. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43215 :
and :
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
ABBIE STIERS :
111 N. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43215 :
and :
JACKIE BARTON :
111 N. Front St.
Columbus, Ohio 43 :
and :
Democracies die behind closed doors . . . When government begins closing doors,
it selectively controls information rightfully belonging to the people. Selective
information is disinformation.
Detroit Free Press v. Ashcroft, 303 F.3d 681, 683 (6th Cir. 2002)
Now comes Andrew Stevens, on relation to the State of Ohio (“Relator”), and for his
1. This is an action to compel compliance with Ohio’s Open Meetings Act (R.C. 121.22);
2. This action results from the conduct of the members of the City of Columbus Historic
members of the Commission would meet for “Business Meetings” without preparing
minutes, and in some occasions, losing, or otherwise making unavailable to the public
2
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
on information and belief attended and participated in the meetings of the Commission at
information and belief attended and participated in the meetings of the Commission at
on information and belief attended and participated in the meetings of the Commission at
on information and belief attended and participated in the meetings of the Commission at
information and belief attended and participated in the meetings of the Commission at
10. Respondent ABBIE STIERS is one of seven members of the Commission, who on
information and belief attended and participated in the meetings of the Commission at
11. Respondent JACKIE BARTON is one of seven members of the Commission, who on
information and belief attended and participated in the meetings of the Commission at
3
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
DANIEL M. MOGAN, ERIN PROSSER, ABBIE STIERS, and JACKIE BARTON are
13. The Commissioner Respondents are named as respondents herein in their official
14. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court under R.C. 121.22; R.C. 143.351; and R.C 149.43.
15. Venue is proper in this Court because the actions or occurrences contained in this
BACKGROUND FACTS
16. R.C. 121.22(C) unequivocally declares “[a]ll meetings of any public body are declared to
be open to the public at all times,” and further declares that “[t]he minutes of a regular or
special meeting of any public body shall be promptly prepared, filed, and maintained and
17. R.C. 121.22(A) requires that the Open Meetings Act “shall be liberally construed to require
public officials to take official action and to conduct all deliberations upon official business
only in open meetings unless the subject matter is specifically excepted by law.”
18. The purposes of the Open Meetings Act include: (i) ensuring openness and accountability
in government; (ii) affording citizens the maximum opportunity to observe the conduct of
public business by public bodies; and (iii) affording the accountability of public officials.
19. “R.C. 121.22 prohibits any private prearranged discussion of public business by a majority
of the members of a public body regardless of whether the discussion occurs face to face,
4
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
of communication.” White v. King, 147 Ohio St.3d 74, 2016-Ohio-2770, 60 N.E.3d 1234,
¶ 15.
20. R.C. 121.22(H) declares invalid any resolution, rule, or formal action of any kind if it was
21. R.C. 121.22(I) provides for the issuance of a mandatory injunction upon the showing of a
22. Columbus Ordinance 3117.03 unequivocally declares that “[a]ll commission meetings
shall be open to the public A record of proceedings shall be maintained and available for
inspection.
23. With respect to the disposal of public records, R.C. 149.351(A) declares:
All records are the property of the public office concerned and shall not be removed,
destroyed, mutilated, transferred, or otherwise damaged or disposed of, in whole or
in part, except as provided by law or under the rules adopted by the records
commissions provided for under sections 149.38 to149.42 of the Revised Code or
under the records programs established by the boards of trustees of state-supported
institutions of higher education under section 149.33 of the Revised Code.
25. In The New Victorian’s, Inc. v. Brown, et. al. (Franklin County Court of Common Pleas,
Case NO. 02 CVH03 2653) (the “Italian Village Suit”), the members of the City of
Columbus’ Italian Village Commission (a public body whose formation, purpose and
5
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
function are substantially similar to those of the Commission) was enjoined to among other
26. The injunction issued in the Italian Village Suit was premised upon a stipulation that the
Italian Village (i.e. a body whose formation, purpose, and function are substantially similar
to those of the Commission) is subject to the requirements of R.C. 121.22 (i.e. it is a “public
body”).
27. On or about December 26, 2018, Relator tendered a public records request upon the
Commission, via email to Connie Torbeck, the Assistant Historic Preservation Officer,
seeking production of the records and minutes of the Commission ‘business meetings” held
in July 2018, August 2018, September 2018, October 2018, November 2018, and
December 2018.
28. In response to such request, the Commission did provide audio recordings of the September
2018 and December 2018 business meetings, but did not produce records responsive to the
request for the records and minutes of the Commission’s business meetings for August,
October, or November 2018; nor did the Commission provide minutes for any of the
requested meetings.
29. When Relator followed up on the missing records, Ms. Torbeck state via email,
“Recordings of the August, October, and November business meetings have not been
located,” and that “Formal minutes and attendance are not taken at the business meetings.”
30. Relator restates and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated
here.
6
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
31. The Commission constitutes a “public body” as defined in the Open Meetings Act. R.C
121.22(B)(1).
32. The Commission and its individual members, i.e. the Commissioner Respondents, named
herein, are subject to, inter alia, the mandates of the Open Meetings Act, which is codified
33. The Ohio Open Meetings Act mandates that the Act itself “shall be liberally construed to
require public officials to take official action and conduct all deliberations upon official
business only in open meetings unless the subject matter is specifically excepted by law.”
R.C. 121.22(A).
34. The Open Meetings Act also mandates that “[a]ll meetings of any public body” be “public
35. On information and belief, on or about July 12, 2018; August 9, 2018; September 13, 2018;
October 11, 2018; November 8, 2018; and December 13, 2018, a majority of the
Commission.
37. On information and belief, during such meetings, a majority of the members of the
Commission met and deliberated on public business and/or took official action on matters
of public business.
38. Despite the mandate of the Open Meetings Act that minutes be “promptly prepared, filed,
and maintained and shall be open to public inspection,” the Commission has, as a matter
of practice and policy, failed to prepare, file, or maintain minutes of its “business
7
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
39. Thus, the Commissioner Respondents and the Commission have violated or threatened to
violate R.C. 121.22 by failing to promptly prepare, file, and maintain minutes of its
business meetings, and to make the same available for public inspection.
40. Relator restates and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully stated
here.
42. On information and belief, the Commission, has a practice of making audio recordings of
43. Such audio recordings constitute “records” as defined in Section 149.011(G) of the Ohio
Revised Code.
44. The Commission has removed, destroyed, transferred, or otherwise disposed of the audio
recordings of the August, October, and November 2018 business meetings, other than as
otherwise dispose of the audio recordings of the August, October, and November 2018
45. The Relator is aggrieved by such removal, destruction, transfer, or otherwise disposition,
WHEREFORE, Relator on behalf of the State of Ohio, hereby prays and request that the Court:
a. Issue a declaratory Judgment that the Commission and the Commissioner Respondents
jointly and severally, have violated or threatened to violate the Open Meetings Act by
failing to promptly prepare, file, and maintain minutes of its business meetings, and to
make the same available for public inspection;
8
Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2019 Mar 28 4:21 PM-19CV002653
c. Pursuant to R.C. 121.22(H), declare invalid any resolution, rule, or formal action of
any kind that was the result of business meetings for which no minutes were created;
e. Pursuant to R.C. 121.22(I), award Relator a civil forfeiture of five hundred dollars for
each distinct violation of the Open Meetings Act, as well as an award of all court costs
and reasonable attorney’s fees; and
f. Pursuant to R.C. 149.351(B)(1), award Relator an award of all court costs and
reasonable attorney’s fees.
Respectfully submitted,