IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FORSYTH COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA. FORSYTH COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff, FILE NO. 12CV-0027 v.

Transcription

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FORSYTH COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA FORSYTH COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff, FILE NO. 12CV-0027 v. TERENCE SWEENEY, SENIOR JUDGE ROBERT B. STRUBLE Defendant. AFFIDAVIT NOW COMES TERENCE SWEENEY who after being duly sworn, states as follows: The undersigned is over the age of majority, laboring under no disabilities and is legally competent to sign this affidavit. The undersigned is a citizen of the United States of America and a resident of Forsyth County, Georgia. BRIEF TO THE COURT CONTAINING APPLICABLE LAW AND CLOSING ARGUMENT The Forsyth County Board of Ethics serves to oversee compliance with the Forsyth County Code of Ethics which governs the actions of Forsyth County s officials and employees.

2 Forsyth County Ordinance Number 77-B is the Ordinance by The Board of Commissioners of Forsyth County and furthers and incorporates the policies and laws of the State of Georgia relating to ethical standards; providing for investigation of ethics complaints and enforcement of ethical standards. Ordinance Number 77-B is included herein by reference. On February 3, 2011, Citizen Sweeney caught a quorum of Forsyth County Commissioners gathered in Cumming City Hall to conduct the public s business without notice to the public. Sweeney filed a complaint against the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners for violating the Open Meetings Act O.C.G.A with Georgia Attorney General and three complaints against individual commissioners Brian Tam, Patrick Bell and Ralph (Pete) Amos for violating Forsyth County Ethics Ordinance with the Forsyth County Board of Ethics. On July 12, 2011, the Forsyth County Board of Ethics dismissed the matter without holding a hearing; however, in a letter dated July 28, 2011, the Attorney General s office ruled that the Board of Commissioners indeed violated the Open Meetings Act. Thus, the Ethics Board decision was appealed to Superior Court on August 11, 2011, but was dismissed on November 22, 2011 not for lack of merit but due the failure to obtain a necessary sanction by pro se litigant Sweeney. The ethics board missed what the Attorney General s office caught. Months went by with several changes to the ethical standards by the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners which seemed to accommodate the habitual failures by the ethics board. Many of the changes seem to be created to insulate the county commissioners from further complaints as aresult of the initial Sweeney complaint. Then corrections were made to alleviate the most recent concerns with the Ethics board. 2

3 In preparation for the appeal before the Forsyth County Superior Court Case No. 11CV- 1650, Sweeney became aware of multiple violations of the Ethics Ordinance by the Forsyth County Board of Ethics. As a conscientious citizen desiring to hold government accountable to the letter of the law, Sweeney filed six ethics complaints against five plus one former, alternate members of the Forsyth County Board of Ethics: Robert Bryan Charles, David Michael Van Sant, Timothy M. Perry, Rushton S. Ricketson, Richard John Lorne Twiner and Ernest Vasco Turner III on December 16, Complainant s sole reason for reporting and filing complaints was to ensure better ethical behavior in government. These six individuals ( Respondents ) violated the rules of the Forsyth County Ethics Ordinance by holding meetings at unauthorized days, times and places. Each individual member recused himself due to a conflict of interest in hearing a complaint filed against him. On December 28, 2011, the Forsyth County Board of Ethics held a meeting to discuss the Sweeney complaints. As respondent to an ethics complaint while an alternate member, now nonmember Turner took a seat at the table with the board, seconded motions and voted to enter into an attorney-client-privileged, executive session. A complaint was filed with Georgia Attorney General for violating the Open Meetings Act for this illegal executive session. (See Exhibit A.) After more than an hour in an illegal executive session, the board voted publicly to authorize its attorney, Logan Butler, to file an answer to the Sweeney complaints with its clerk and file for declaratory judgment with the Forsyth County Superior Court. On January 4, 2012, after further consideration, conflicted board counsel Logan Butler explains why he cannot file a response on behalf of individual board members. Board Chairman Bob Charles asks for a motion to rescind the vote to have the board counsel file a response. 3

4 After an awkward moment of silence form the board, Chairman Charles announced, That item dies for lack of a motion. After recessing for another executive session in which Turner was not allowed to participate the board returns to immediately vote to revisit the agenda item to consider rescinding their vote to instruct board counsel Butler to file a response (time = 29 minutes). The instant motion by the Board of Ethics to handle one item only specific to the defense of the individual board members creates yet another violation. The board voted unanimously to rescind the vote to have Butler file a response to the six Sweeney complaints. In spite of Butler s stated conflict of interest in representing individual respondents Charles, Van Sant, Perry, Ricketson, Twiner and Turner at the Court s request, Butler questioned witnesses at the hearing on April 27, 2012 and filed a brief on behalf of respondents on May 4, Statements from the hearing on April 27, 2012: MR. BUTLER: Judge, if I could clarify one other issue, and I know you're not going to be overly formal with the procedure and I'm fine with that. But since, I guess, the substance is the Sweeney complaint against the board members, Mr. Robert Charles is here. He is the current chair of the Board and, technically, he's representing himself today, Judge. I'm not acting as his attorney. I'm the attorney for the Board of Ethics, so I wanted to clarify that, Judge. And, Mr. Turner is here. He was an alternate member for some hearings that took place this past summer. I had recused from those hearings, so I don't know much about them. He has a doctor's appointment. He showed up. He's filed his answer, Judge, and he just basically wants to rest on the pleadings. He wanted to come in but then he's going to have to leave for a pre-scheduled doctor's appointment. So when it comes to, I guess, my responsibility, I don't think I should be, I guess, questioning Mr. Charles as I'm not his attorney. But I will follow the Court's guidance on how you want us to proceed, Judge. THE COURT: I would ask that you question him based upon the fact that it's easier for me to get the facts when someone asks the questions and I listen to the answers. How about the sequestration of witness, does either side desire that? 4

5 Likewise, Butler filed a response to complainant s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief on May 16, Butler had no instruction from the six pro se litigants or from the Court to file said response which is clearly a conflict of interest as counsel to the Forsyth County Board of Ethics. This unauthorized, unsolicited, conflicted, legal counsel provided by Esquire Logan Butler violates the Georgia Bar Code of Ethics and has placed pro se complainant Sweeney at an unfair disadvantage. Butler s conflicted actions have tipped the playing field to favor the six respondents. Complainant did not lawyer up because he expected a level playing field. Also, a citizen has a right to redress his government for grievances. Butler without exception accepted and did not controvert Sweeney s reading into the record of Failures of Respondent to follow the Forsyth County Ethics Ordinance in responding to the Sweeney Complaint document that was previously submitted to the court. Butler s single question focused on a claim about complainant seeking attention but failed to provide any admissible evidence to support his claim. Citizen Sweeney did not seek out an interview as claimed by Mr. Butler. Butler seems intent on finding some grounds to take retaliatory action against me. Four respondents Van Sant, Perry, Ricketson and Twiner failed to even attend the hearing before the Court on April 27, The failure of the litigants to arrive in the courtroom seems to be a slap in the face for the entire procedure. Ricketson s response filed January 13, 2012 lacks a necessary notary seal. (See Exhibit B). Additionally, Turner s response was never filed with the Forsyth County Board of Ethics as required. Furthermore, Butler s brief filed May 4, 2012 did not arrive at complainant s address because of insufficient postage due. 5

6 Sweeney sought out the response from the Forsyth County Clerk of Court. Sweeney obtained an electronic copy of said brief on May 8, 2012 via . Butler s response includes an improper date of May 30, 2012 referencing our hearing which actually took place on April 30, The Court identified and allowed less formal proceedings. The issue before the court is whether there were ethical violations of Ethics rules for Forsyth County. Mr. Butler argues a compelling case about the Open Meetings Act; however that is not the subject of this complaint before the Court. The local rules compound with the State Laws when not in conflict with State Law. Local jurisdictions often create additional rules that are more restrictive as was the case in Forsyth County. If this were not the case, then why have local rules at all? Throughout the entire process it has become abundantly clear that rules, especially small ones, simply don t matter to the Forsyth County Board of Ethics. The responses by the Forsyth County Board of Ethics individual members failed to follow the rules for providing a response which were detailed in the filing: Failures of Respondent to follow the Forsyth County Ethics Ordinance in responding to the Sweeney Complaint. Mr. Butler seems to agree that rules were not followed, but only provides excuses as why the rules were too difficult to be followed. He offers no explanation as to why the Forsyth County Ethics Board failed to adopt rules, regulations and procedures to avoid the excuses presented as a defense before the court. From Forsyth County Ethics Rules Duties and Powers: The board of ethics shall have the following duties and powers: (1) Establish any procedures, rules and regulations 6

7 governing its internal organization and conduct of its affairs, provided that such procedures, rules and regulations do not conflict with any provision contained in this article. Basic organization never took place. Simply put, the Forsyth County Board of Ethics doesn t take their job seriously and cares not to follow its own rules. The Board of Ethics could have established the meeting time for all of its meetings or changed the rule, but they never cared to look at that rule. The Court has the ultimate authority in these matters. Prior to the Courts involvement, several procedural issues existed which were outlined in documents submitted to the Court. As Mr. Butler noted in the first sentence of his brief at the express direction of the Court which begins to identify the failure to properly disclose a conflict to the Court in which a motion was unanimously passed to expressly prohibit Mr. Butler from serving as the attorney for the individual Forsyth County Ethics Board members. See attached Ethics Board minutes from January 4, (See Exhibit C). Mr. Butler had an obligation to make the Court aware and to respectfully object to the Courts request to serve as the individual attorney for the six ethics board members. Also, all of the complaint responses are styled almost identically. And in the brief filed by Butler there is the line The members of Ethics Board through their filed Answers to the Complaints. Not a complete sentence and possibly quite telling as to the concerted effort to illegally use county funds and go against the vote of the board to use a county paid attorney. This is another indication of the unauthorized use of the ethics board attorney to handle their personal case. I expected a level playing field with pro se litigants and found myself defending against the power and might of a county paid attorney. Mr. Butler has access to court cases to support his 7

8 positions. Sweeney does not have these resources at his disposal. Would the ethics board members have mounted such a defense in a pro se litigant fashion? Butler claims no harm to Sweeney; however, complainant hoped to have the proceeding recorded to review, but the videographer went to the wrong location. The board could have reviewed their rules and understood them. The request to disband wasn t a request to eliminate the board, but a request to replace the board with members who agree to read the rules, to understand the rules, to train regarding the rules. Just recently, the Board of Ethics was asked to provide an advisory opinion regarding a conflict of interest. It was the first advisory opinion issued by the Board of Ethics, but it was discovered that no procedures existed for the board to follow upon receipt of this type of request. The statements contained herein are true to the best of Complainant s knowledge and FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. 8

9 Exhibit A May 14, 2012 Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens Senior Assistant Attorney General Stefan Ritter Special Assistant Shiela Guider Department of Law 40 Capitol Square, SW Atlanta, GA Dear Attorney General, et al.: Please click link to view the "Nydeo" of the meeting Forsyth County Board of Ethics 12/28/11. On December 28, 2011, the Forsyth County Board of Ethics entered into executive session [time = 3:15] with former, alternate member Ernest Turner who previously served for the recused ethics board member Timothy Perry in July Mr. Turner's temporary service on the board had expired when he participated in said meeting. Non-member Turner took a seat at the table with the board, seconded motions and voted to enter into executive session. Non-member Turner participated in an attorney-client privileged, executive session. I allege that the executive session with non-member Turner in attendance was a violation of the Open Meetings Act O.C.G.A (1): The attorney-client privilege recognized by state law to the extent that a meeting otherwise required to be open to the public under this chapter may be closed in order to consult and meet with legal counsel pertaining to pending or potential litigation, settlement, claims, administrative proceedings, or other judicial actions brought or to be brought by or against the agency or any officer or employee or in which the agency or any officer or employee may be directly involved; provided, however, the meeting may not be closed for advice or consultation on whether to close a meeting. I respectfully request that the Georgia Attorney General's office investigate my allegation against the Forsyth County Board of Ethics. Kind regards, Nydia Tisdale nydiatisdale@hotmail.com YouTube.com/nydiatisdale AboutForsyth.com 1240 Oakhaven Drive Roswell, GA phone cell

10 Exhibit B

11 Exhibit C

12