Minutes
LAFAYETTE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Special Meeting
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Meeting called to order: 9:04 a.m.
Members Present: Trustee Lee Kehoe, Trustee Lynda Bowers, Trustee Donald Butler, Fiscal Officer Shirley Bailey
Mr. Butler reported that he had received a letter dated 3/27/2008 from Kenneth Boca, Chief Deputy of the Medina
County Sheriff’s Office. This letter addressed the Lafayette Township deputies being laid off. Mr. Butler read the
letter. (See attached)
Mr. Kehoe stated that according to the accounts in the newspapers and to the letter received by Mr. Butler, the
township will have the deputies that have been serving the township laid off by the Medina County Sheriff’s Office.
According to Lafayette’s contract with the Sheriff’s Office, these officers can be replaced with other deputies from the
Sheriff’s Office with the trustees’ approval.
Mr. Butler moved to allow attorney Allan Michelson to represent the interest of Lafayette Township ensuring the terms
and conditions of the August 14, 2007 contract are enforced and to authorize Fiscal Officer Bailey to pay from the
unencumbered balance in the general fund whatever filing fees and court costs may be necessary to accomplish that.
Ms. Bowers seconded the motion, citing that the County Prosecutor’s obligation is to represent the Sheriff, the
Commissioners, and the township. In this situation, it would not be responsible to require the County Prosecutor to
represent the township. All voting in favor.
Ms. Sue Heiszek asked to have this situation explained. Mr. Butler explained that the dispute is over a legal contract.
Our contract states that the deputies working Lafayette Township can not be laid off. Mr. Kehoe stated that we would
have 3 deputies patrolling the township from the Sheriff’s Office.
Mr. Jack Heiszek asked if we were fighting the police union. Mr. Butler replied that the township was fighting for the
contract.
Ms. Sue Heiszek stated that she recalled the Sheriff stating that this clause of lay-offs could be challenged in court.
Mr. Jack Blank supported Ms. Heiszek’s statement.
Ms. Sue Heiszek asked if there is a cap on the amount of money to be spent. Mr. Butler replied we hope to know more
by this afternoon after conferring with Mr. Michelson.
Mr. Tony Wenslow asked about the expertise of Attorney Michelson. Mr. Kehoe replied Mr. Michelson represents a
couple of communities within Wayne County. Mr. Wenslow asked if he was contractual. Ms. Bowers replied that Mr.
Michelson is well versed in contracts. He has filed suit against the same people that may be filed upon in this instance.
Ms. Bowers stated that the tact that Mr. Michelson will choose to use is not for the board to speculate upon.
Ms. Sue Heiszek asked if his fee was still $125 an hour. The board replied yes.
Mr. Jack Heiszek asked how many hours would be authorized for Mr. Michelson to work on this. Mr. Kehoe replied that
had not been determined at this time. The board will have a conversation with Mr. Michelson to determine the best
course of action. Mr. Heiszek asked if it was open-ended. Mr. Kehoe replied at this time it is. Mr. Heiszek stated that
this could bankrupt the township theoretically. Mr. Kehoe replied he would not say that.
Ms. Sue Heiszek asked if this would be done at a public meeting. Mr. Kehoe replied yes.
Mr. Jack Blank asked who would pay the unemployment if these officers are laid off. Mr. Kehoe replied that is a good
question. The Sheriff claims the deputies are the sheriff’s employees. Ms. Bailey stated that the Sheriff’s Office would
have to pay unemployment since they are listed under the Bureau of Worker’s Compensation as employees of the
Sheriff’s Department.
Ms. Sue Heiszek asked if this was in effect since last August of 2006. Ms. Bailey replied with the Bureau of Workman’s
Compensation, yes. Unless the township lays off the deputies, the responsibility lies with the Sheriff’s Department. Ms.
Bowers stated that the township is responsible for reimbursement of any financial obligation that is incurred as a result
of us. This situation was not incurred by us. Had we stopped the contract, then we would have to reimburse. This was
not our action.
Mr. Gene Garbaccio asked about the wording of the contract. He asked why the trustees would be the ones to
determine which Sheriff’s Deputies would be patrolling Lafayette. What is their expertise over the sheriff? Mr. Kehoe
stated that was part of the contract. The Sheriff would present a list of qualified candidates to the trustees. Mr.
Garbaccio asked what the criteria would be to determine qualification. Mr. Kehoe stated that the trustees would narrow
down a larger list from the Sheriff. The trustees would look at the candidates’ actual experience. Mr. Garbaccio
continued asking what would make one candidate more qualified over another.
Mr. Curtis Perkins commented that he sees crime ramping up, presumably because the economy is suffering. Mr.
Perkins wonders why the county can cut the Sheriff’s budget just to keep a good bond rating. He doesn’t understand
that way of thinking by the County Commissioners.
Mr. Tony Wenslow stated that he feels that Sheriff Neil Hassinger is being blamed for the lay-offs. He would like an
explanation of how these lay-offs came about. Mr. Kehoe replied that according to what he has read in the paper,
there were budget cuts that were passed down from the Commissioners to the Sheriff’s Department. He is not sure
who made the decision at the Sheriff’s level, but would assume the Sheriff is responsible.
Mr. Jack Blank stated that the union contract also states that seniority prevails. Our three officers who serve Lafayette
have no seniority with the Sheriff’s Department.
Mr. Tony Wenslow asked if finances were available. The township paid for all the expenses of these three deputies.
What budget cut for these three men necessitated the lay-off? The commissioners are actually saving six ways. They
are saving three budget wages in the county by transposing that financial burden onto Lafayette Township. He
understands that Medina is one of the wealthiest communities in the state. Maybe we should be at the Commissioners
Meeting. The township fought long and hard to retain our current deputies because they are knowledgeable about the
township. Mr. Wenslow has concerns about new deputies not having the same knowledge of Lafayette Township. Ms.
Bowers repeated a comment by a reporter stating, but not for the fact that Lafayette Township funds these three
officers for the sheriff’s department, paying every cost incurred by them, her understanding is that the commissioners
would be laying off six officers. It makes little sense to our residents that budget cuts would affect our officers that we
pay for. Mr. Butler stated that Sheriff Hassinger was not in town when this event took place. Mr. Butler understands
that the union labor attorney and the attorney for the county convinced the sheriff’s department that the union contract
prevailed over the contract with the township. Mr. Butler stated that the township is not looking at a long drawn out
legal battle, but does want to seek legal counsel for direction. Mr. Kehoe stated that if we accept a list and choose
three other deputies to patrol the township we will still have a contract. We will still have coverage.
Mr. Tony Wenslow stated that he had worked for the UAW for 40 years. He does not understand how there is a
controversy with the contracts. Lafayette’s contract stipulates that the Sheriff’s Department can not lay off our
deputies. He feels it is illegal for the sheriff to do so. Mr. Kehoe stated that is why we wish to obtain a legal
clarification. The Township was not consulted in this situation. The union and the attorney for the county discussed
and convinced Mr. Baca to go in this direction.
Mr. Gene Garbaccio stated that he also worked with the UAW. He stated that no one was ever laid off from a UAW
shop and then hired to replace people who were laid off.
Ms. Bowers stated that the township’s original contract was prepared by the attorneys with the Medina County
Prosecutor’s Office. The final contract had some revisions made by Mr. Michelson. The contract had been reviewed
by the Sheriff, Mr. Michelson, and the trustees, line by line, and was approved. She imagines that a similar process
was held with the union and their contract. There is a conflicting clause with the two contracts. The attorneys will have
to work this conflict out.
Ms. Sue Heiszek commented that the three men whose jobs we are trying to save are under no obligation to stay with
the township. If advancement is available, they would be able to take it. The township may be fighting for three people
who could leave whenever they wanted. Ms. Bowers replied that the township is pursuing the agreement that was
made.
Mr. Kehoe asked to recess the meeting until 6:00 p.m. The trustees will be speaking with Mr. Michelson and a decision
may be necessary at that time. Mr. Butler moved to recess the meeting with Mr. Kehoe seconding.
Mr. Kehoe telephoned Fiscal Officer Bailey and notified her that the meeting was officially closed at 2:08 p.m.