Geauga record. [volume] (Chardon, Geauga County, Ohio) 1952-1962, 1954-04-15

81, A and 20 with a million
dollars worth of equipment in
the county, they could bid on
our road contracts, give us
better roads, and save tn e
taxpayer Smoney.
Although their bid was sew
eral thousands lower than the
local bidder, their bid was
thrown out on a technicality.
Since this was a serious
charge, 1 telephoned COM
missioner Tom White and ask
ed for an audience and his
views. He advised me t h 1t
since the contracts had not yet
been signed, he would talk
with the other commissioners
and ''let me know" 1 then ask
ed him if he knew that one
of the county officials was a
partner of the favored local
road contractor and that it was
criminal offenSe for coun-
ty official to profit from a
county contract.
"In Chardon I met and
talked with Commissioner Lowe
and asked to be permitted to
attend the meeting to discuss
these serious charges. He told
me that I could not a tt end
these discussions. Later G o m
missioner White called me to
tell me that my charges had
been correct and that the con-
tract had been withdrawn for
future letting. BY Mr.. Whites
admission and unknown to me
the commissioners consulted
the County Prosecutor who adj
vised them that my charges
were correct and that tn e
County Engineer would have to
sever his connection with the
road contractor.
A week later this partnership
was dissolved. 1 have here a
copy of the newspaper in which
the dissolution is printed. But
note this. Was the dissolution
published in the Geauga coun-
ty paper or in the PaineSville
Telegraph? It was not 1t was
published in the Willoughby
paper that has little circulation
/ in GnoI1no anr1Y1tu
Now I have been attacked
in the Burton paper for stating
that the "newspapermen were
not permitted to attend the
commission meetings" The
reporter for this paper has
stated to me that he attends
every meeting of the Geauga
county Commission. If he is
such a sincere reporter and a
regular attendant at the meet
ingS, why was this story not
printed in his paper
Il demand an apology from
his editor and his paper. Any
lawyer or citizen here knows
that the county Commissioners
cannot bar a citizen from their
meetings. But when discussions
and deliberations of public in
tereSt are held privately or by
telephone isn't the public being
locked out? Mr.. White told me
last week that for twelve years
the Commissioners had an un-
derStanding that they would
never cast a dissenting vote.
Our Commissioners have been
like the three monkeys no
see no evil, hear no evil and
speak no evil.
Nov I often disagree with
Editor John Gore. 1 grippe
about his paper just as you do
at times. But I admire John
a great deal for the stand he
took against the Commission
ers' policy. When he asked to
attend the meetings and re-
port the news as he interpreted
it, he was told that it was un-
necessary and that he could
see Wilma who kept the Off
cial journal.
"And this official commits
sioners' journal is a joke. Every
resolution is passed unanimous
ly. Can three men of good
judgement and sound reason
meet every Monday for years
and never disagree? You can
search the journal from cover
to cover and find no reference
to the road scandal. A couple
of weeks after the partnership
was dissolved, the road con-
tracts were re-let and award
ed to the same contractor and
later paid. Now wasn't there
a fragrant neglect of duty here?
Did our Commissioners inves-
tigate this partnership and try
and discover if the County
Engineer had profited fro m
this deal? They did not.
'I stated earlier that I would
Continued on page eight