Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Government Integrity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public clash at Trumbull County meeting over $80,857 transfer; motion to make township whole fails
Summary
Public commenters and trustees pressed commissioners to help recover $80,857 they say was transferred from a township account; the auditor and other speakers disagreed about the facts and the motion asking the prosecutor to identify a fund to temporarily repay the township failed on a voice vote.
An extended public-comment exchange at the Trumbull County Board of Commissioners meeting focused on an $80,857 transfer that Pizzetta (transcript variant) Township trustee Michael Hovis said was moved to Green Dot Bank and has left the township short of funds. Hovis and other trustees urged the board to take steps to restore the money and asked whether the prosecutor’s office could authorize a temporary repayment from a county fund.
Hovis said the transfer left the township ‘‘missing $80,857’’ and described difficulty obtaining records or legal clarity from the auditor’s office. He and other trustees said news reports and internal correspondence suggested a transfer to an online bank and raised questions about compliance with the Ohio Revised Code.
The county auditor (speaker identified in the record but who did not read a full name at the meeting) told the board she had ceased communication with some parties after receiving a letter from an attorney she described as containing inaccuracies and said she was seeking legal counsel. The auditor also said the bank in question is a licensed U.S.-based online bank and disputed the claim that a statutory prohibition applied as alleged in the public letter.
A commissioner (speaker 5) moved from the floor to request that the prosecutor’s office identify whether the county could loan or otherwise make the $80,857 available to the township from an appropriate fund pending resolution. Debate focused on whether the prosecutor’s office had a conflict because it represents multiple parties, including the auditor and the county, and whether it could advise on a fund the commissioners control. Miss Frenchko voted yes on the motion; Mister Cantalamasa voted no; the chair also recorded a no vote. The motion failed.
Members of the public and some commissioners repeatedly called for legal counsel and emphasized that FBI agents were investigating elements of the situation; the transcript records references to an FBI investigation but does not include investigative findings. Commissioners said they will coordinate with legal counsel and the prosecutor’s office about what help is permissible while an investigation is ongoing.
Next steps noted in the meeting record: the auditor is working on obtaining legal counsel; commissioners said they would consult with the prosecutor’s office and follow legal advice before taking extraordinary steps to disburse county funds. The record does not show a plan for immediate repayment or further binding action by the board during the meeting.
Note on transcript inconsistencies: the transcript includes multiple inconsistent spellings for the township name and for participants’ names and contains an unclear numeric transcription in other agenda items; this article uses the names and amounts as stated on the public record and flags where the record is inconsistent.
