Prosecutor's ruling on negotiations should give residents and trustees pause

EDITOR:
The Vindicator story, "Ruling goes against trustee," pertaining to an opinion rendered by Prosecutor Paul Gains is most disturbing to me and it should start stomachs churning among the residents of all local townships.
Mahoning County Prosecutor Gains has potentially hobbled conscientious trustees who attempt to perform their constitutional and statutory responsibilities in an informed manner. I wonder what Mr. Gains' opinion would be of township officials who must conduct negotiations with unions due to the fact that their governments do not enjoy the ability to hire a political appointee who carries the title of administrator. In addition, it is primary to the discussion to realize that the role of an administrator is sketchy, at best, in the Ohio Revised Code (505.032. Township Administrator; powers and duties). Even on a first read, it is obvious that the code does not establish the position of administrator as some feudal lord appointed to conduct affairs of state without challenge or interference from the very trustees who hired him. The simple fact is that an administrator is an expensive tool in the box of resources available to trustees to aid them in the performance of their constitutional service to the people they represent. We don't have the right to hire a person and then heap our governing responsibilities on that person.
Mr. Gains is quoted as saying that "a member of a board of township trustees may not directly participate in the negotiations process by attending sessions and retain the right to reject the proposed tentative agreement." I can't swallow that idea. How is a trustee expected to learn important details on a subject, if he/she is not directly involved in aspects of the discussions that gave rise to the outcome? Trustees are not judges. We are hybrids of legislative and executive elected officials. Therefore, we should enjoy the same latitudes allowed state representatives and senators in their rights to participate in hearings prior to votes being taken.
Further, the ORC dictates that the trustees "may assign ... duties" to an administrator. The prosecutor is not given the right to establish a defacto dictatorship by assigning his own definition of the duties of this township hired and paid for employee. While trustees may assign managerial responsibilities to an administrator to insure continuity of service to the public, that assignment should not be interpreted by anyone to mean that the trustees have surrendered control of township business to that administrator.
Since the article dealt with a series of incidents involving Trustee Kathy Miller, I want to close this letter by saluting this lady for providing an example of conscientious involvement by an elected representative of the residents of Boardman Township. I feel that she deserves their vocal support on this subject. If it is a fact that an administrator has such broad control of township governance, perhaps the 50 or so townships where that office has been established out of 1,308 such political subdivisions in Ohio should consider carefully whether they should opt to endorse Mr. Gains' creation of such a powerful entity by continuing to employ anyone who holds that title.
JOHN W. VOGEL
Weathersfield trustee
Mineral Ridge