Commissioners hire 2 law firms in 3 disputes; Moore votes 'no' on all 3

Legal fees could be racking up for the Board of Commissioners after they voted Wednesday to hire two law firms to represent one of their own, the county Auditor's Office and the county Clerk of Courts office in three separate legal disputes. At issue are the ongoing lawsuit by former Lorain County 911 Director Harry Williamson against multiple current and former county officials, Auditor Craig Snodgrass' planned appeal of the NEXUS pipeline tax valuation and a contract dispute between a vendor and Lorain County Common Pleas and Domestic Relations courts for which Clerk of Courts Tom Orlando requested an attorney's help. Commissioner David Moore, a Republican, voted three times against hiring outside attorneys to consult with elected county officials, citing different reasons each time. The vote turned out the same all three times: Moore voted "no" but Commissioners Matt Lundy, a Democrat, and Michelle Hung, a Republican, voted "yes" to hire outside counsel. Attorneys "seem to be getting very wealthy off us," Moore said Wednesday. Williamson lawsuit Moore voted against hiring the law firm Sutter O'Connell to represent Hung, who was issued a subpoena in connection with her boyfriend Williamson's lawsuit against the county in Common Pleas Court. Moore said he wasn't comfortable with the county getting "an open-ended bill for her attorney for her personal use." "That's why I voted 'no' and why she voted 'yes,'" Moore said. "I think she has a personal conflict of interest" and should have abstained from the vote. Hung referred all questions about the matter to Chief Assistant Lorain County Prosecutor Dan Petticord, the board's attorney. Sutter O'Connell will represent Hung on a specific issue: A subpoena by a co-defendant for documents she might have created while serving as commissioner, Petticord said. It wasn't clear what those documents were or might contain. "The attorneys representing the board in the Williamson case didn't feel comfortable representing Hung in regards to the subpoena," he explained. Moore and Lundy voted to fire Williamson in August 2021 after learning of the extramarital affair he was having with Hung while 911 director. Hung abstained from that vote. She told The Chronicle she didn't want to have her hands in a "bloodbath," but refused to comment whether her abstention was because she and Williamson were having an affair. Both were married to others at the time. Williamson's marriage ended and Hung later filed for divorce from her husband, according to court records. In January, Williamson sued the county, Moore, Lundy, former county Administrators Tom Williams and Jim Cordes, attorney Amanda Martinsek and her law firm, Ulmer & Berne, which had done legal work for the county. Williamson claimed retaliation, wrongful termination, interference with civil rights, intimidation, falsification, and tampering with and destruction of evidence and public records. The lawsuit is ongoing. Williamson admitted in his suit, and Hung in a legal deposition, that they had a romantic relationship prior to and during his tenure. Hung testified that it started in September 2020, two months before she was elected commissioner and four months before she voted to hire Williamson as the county's new 911 director.Hung did so without telling Lundy or Moore of the relationship. NEXUS pipeline Lorain County Auditor Craig Snodgrass has asked the board to back him in his appeal against the Ohio Tax Commissioner's lowered valuation of the NEXUS pipeline. In a 2-1 vote Wednesday, Hung and Lundy voted to hire the law firm Roetzel & Andress to represent Snodgrass. Snodgrass and Lundy have advocated for fighting the cause, while Hung said she wouldn't deny a fellow elected official the request. Moore called the appeal "a waste of money." "This is going to be nothing more than wasting taxpayer funds on a case that cannot be won. So I'll be voting no," he said. Lundy said he saw it differently. "Somebody's got to stand up and speak up for the schools and the communities and hold NEXUS accountable," he said. And while Lundy said he doesn't like paying high-priced attorneys either, "to get to the bottom line and to have the matter drilled down on and reviewed properly it requires we take this action." Hung said she wasn't going to deny Snodgrass his request for legal representation. Moore said he knows Roetzel & Andress "quite well," having "used them for years." "The attorney that worked there has moved on, I followed him, so I am no longer a client of Roetzel," Moore said. NEXUS filed a "protective appeal" Aug. 26 "as a necessary procedural step to protect our position in supporting the settlement agreement," the company said. In a letter to the auditors in all 13 counties crossed by the NEXUS pipeline, NEXUS spokesman Adam Parker said the venture is "committed to achieving a timely tax settlement" with the Ohio Department of Taxation and the involved counties. The board's decision to permit Snodgrass to hire a consultant for a planned passed 2-1 with Moore voting "no." That "throws a wrench in (the) multimillion-dollar tax settlement on NEXUS pipeline," Parker said. "Nexus' preferred outcome is for the settlement agreement to be accepted and implemented by all stakeholders so that everyone could achieve a timely resolution to the case which would provide additional revenue and budgeting certainty to school districts and other governmental units across 13 counties along the pipeline route," he wrote. NEXUS will withdraw its appeal if Snodgrass decides not to appeal, Parker said. Snodgrass has until Tuesday to decide, he told commissioners. Any appeals by Lorain County or other auditors would return the matter to a formal tax appeals process, affecting the timing and amount of future tax revenue, Parker wrote. Fighting the matter in court could take "several years" during which NEXUS would only be required to pay the undisputed portion of its tax bills. Courts dispute The board also voted 2-1 Wednesday to hire Roetzel & Andress to provide legal counsel for Orlando. Common Pleas judges have raised concerns that Pioneer has not yet delivered a digital court case management system based on a contract signed at least three years ago. Orlando requested outside legal representation for his office in an Aug. 19 letter to commissioners after the prosecutor's office withdrew, citing conflicts of interest because it normally represents both Orlando and the judges. Judge Mark Betleski, the senior and presiding judge in Common Pleas Court, told commissioners he and the other judges "do not believe there is a dispute between the courts and clerks" that requires outside counsel. Moore agreed: "I don't think the taxpayers should pay for more lawyers yet," he said, vocally emphasizing the word "yet." Betleski said Pioneer gave the courts four "go live" dates in 2021 that came and went with no system in place. The company has 45 days from when the county sent it a "cure letter" to fix the issues and fulfill its contract, Betleski and Petticord said. Orlando's staff attorneys, the courts, the judges and the prosecutor's office worked on the dispute, but "none of us are satisfied with the progress," Betleski said. Lundy said he hoped the judges, clerk's office and other parties would "stay at the table" and "keep the conversation going." When the prosecutor's office has a conflict of interest, "then I think it's our responsibility to provide legal counsel," he said. Hung said she had "faith" the dispute could be resolved "amicably and quickly." "I think this is one that could be solved rather quickly and not go into a large expense," she said. Orlando had no comment Thursday. A message seeking additional comment was left for Betleski. Contact Dave O'Brien at (440) 329-7129 or dobrien@chroniclet.com. Follow him on Twitter @DaveOBrienCT.