Judge responds to city-filed suit

The issue is now before the Ohio Supreme Court.
By JOHN W. GOODWIN JR.
VINDICATOR TRUMBULL STAFF
GIRARD -- City officials have filed a lawsuit demanding use of the Girard Municipal Court facilities, but Judge Michael Bernard stands firm in his opposition and details the reasons behind it.
Judge Bernard, in early May, issued an order banning council from using the courtroom to conduct meetings. The judge said the court is to be used only for court business.
Judge Bernard had asked council in 2004 to have its meetings in the courtroom, saying the court facilities would add security and professionalism to the meetings. The court also is handicap accessible -- something not available in the old council chambers.
Before 2004, council and the court shared the former city council chambers in an adjoining building.
In the suit filed in the Ohio Supreme Court by Atty. Frank Bodor of Warren, the city says that it uses the court facilities only when it is not being used by the court and that Judge Bernard has overstepped his authority by banning use of the facilities with a promise of jail for those who disregard his order.
The suit also says that the court facilities are public property owned and operated by the city of Girard and "there is no legitimate reason why the city officials and taxpayers should not be entitled to continue using the facility as it has in the past, when it is not being used for court business."
City's request
The city lawsuit asks that the Supreme Court prevent Judge Bernard from barring council from use of the court facilities, make the judge supply a set of keys to city officials and stop the judge from threatening officials with arrest for using the court facilities.
The suit includes references to case law meant to strengthen the city's claim that the judge overstepped his authority in issuing the order. There is also a statement from President of Council Reynald Paolone about a discussion he had with the judge in regard to the order.
Paolone, in the statement, said he asked the judge, "Why are you doing this, you are going to put the legislative and executive branch against you?" He said the judge replied "I'm going to bury him." The statement doesn't indicate to whom the judge was referring.
Judge Bernard denies making that statement. He said his decision to ban council from using the court was based on sound reasoning and not a personal vendetta against anyone.
"I categorically deny making that comment or anything close to it," he said. "I never use that comment, 'bury someone'; it is not my way of thinking."
Judge Bernard said the court is designed to be used as a court, not council chambers.
Reason for earlier offer
The judge said his earlier invitation to allow council to use the court was an attempt to ease an already strained relationship between the court and the city administration and council. The city's response, he said, has been to cut funding to the court by 33 percent for 2006.
City officials have expressed discontent over being banned from a courtroom for which they say taxpayers are footing the bill, but according to Judge Bernard the court, via court fees and fines, has paid for the court facilities. He said the court occupies about 35 percent of the new building that it's in and has paid for 35 percent of its construction costs. The police department also occupies the building.
Judge Bernard also said he is mandated by the Supreme Court to put in place a plan to protect those using the court -- something, he said, council did not take seriously. He said council would conduct meetings without proper security at the doors to the building, leave doors to the courtroom open and unlocked and fail to check the building for stragglers before leaving.
"They didn't even turn out the lights," he said. "These are the reasons. I am not acting arbitrarily."
Judge Bernard also made reference to suggestions that he does not care about the city's financial hardships, saying his court, in recent years, has given the city $1.7 million over and above normal fines and costs.