Shelby Co. (ECWd) –
We first covered the Ethics issues with Tad Mayhall, Shelby County Board Chairman in this article.
Within that article were links to the ethics policy, state law, and basically a road map the County Ethics Committee could follow since there have been multiple ethics complaints filed against Mayhall for the alleged endorsement of a candidate with the use of the county seal and letterhead, along with his name as County Board Chairman. As of publication, we understand there are at least 5 separate ethics complaints filed against Mayhall’s alleged political endorsement letter. Mayhall has refused to answer our question on the matter, as well as that from a sitting county board member.
After looking at the agenda for this month’s county board meeting, it has become crystal clear that certain people in Shelby County have absolutely no regard for the law, let alone its own internal ordinances.
The agenda indicates the appointments for the Ethics Commission are upon recommendation of the State’s Attorney. Why disregard the ethics ordinance that indicates appointments are to be made by the County Chairman’s recommendation? In the event of a conflict, the Vice Chairman would normally fulfill the duties of the Chair, but I digress; this is Shelby County.
According to the adopted Ethics Ordinance, upon receipt of an ethics complaint, the commission is obligated to provide notice to the respondent and the complainant of the date, time, and place of the meeting to determine the sufficiency of the complaint within three business days. (section 5.5(b) of the ordinance)
“The notices to the respondent and the complainant shall also advise them of the date, time and place of the meeting to determine the sufficiency of the complaint and to establish whether probable cause exists to proceed.”
The letter sent regarding the complaint filed by Erica Firnhaber not only failed to notify her of the date, time, and place of the meeting, but it also indicated claims that are in conflict with responses to our Freedom of Information Act request on this matter.
The letter sent to Firnhaber came from the Assistant States Attorney, Gina Vonderhiede. According to her letter, she is the Ethics Commission “Advisor”. We have asked for any record of such an appointment to that position, as that is a requirement under section 4-1 of the ordinance. We have searched the available online records and have not located any such appointment; this is why we made a formal request, given that a prior response indicates something different.
We asked for the names of the Ethics Commission board. We were provided three names: Gina Vonderhiede, Walter Lookofsky, and Gary Kull. If Vonderhiede is a board member, she can’t also be the Ethics Advisor to the Commission.
Within the letter, it indicates a belief that there was a vacancy on the board since Judge Michael Kiley relocated. That name was never provided as 1 of the three commission members, so we have no clue when or how he would have ever been appointed.
According to county records, the last record of appointments was done back in May of 2004. The ordinance indicates the terms of office are for two years for 2 commissioners and 1 year for the third. That being the case, there are no members of an ethics commission currently, as their terms have all expired, which indicates the county dropped the ball for years by not reapointing them or filling those vacancies upon the end of those members’ terms.
Fast forward to the current agenda for this month’s county board meeting, and what do we see?
“Discussion and vote to reappoint Walt Lookofsky and Gary Kull to the Ethics Commission for a two-year term upon recommendation of the State’s Attorney’s office”.
Why would this county board appoint these two members who were the same ones appointed back in 2004 when they failed to comply with even the most basic obligations as members of the ethics commission?
We asked for the following items, all obligations for an ethics commission.
- A copy of the Statement of Economic Interests for the Ethics Commission members for the last 5 years.
- A copy of the Open Meetings Act Training Certificates for the Ethics Commission members.
- A copy of the FOIA training certificate for the FOIA officer of the Ethics Commission members.
- A copy of the minutes from the last 5 meetings held by the Ethics Commission.
- A copy of the minutes from the Ethics Commission, where a FOIA officer was appointed
The county has no records for any of the above items, which indicates the laws we are supposed to follow have been ignored by the Ethics Commission members named by the County: Gina Vonderhiede, Walt Lookofsky, and Gary Kull.
Nothing like appointing people who failed to follow the most basic obligations under our laws as Ethics Commission board members.
More interesting in this circus is the fact that the board is only appointing 2 members when clearly the ordinance indicates it is to be a three-member board. If they are of the belief that Vonderhiede is a current board member, as indicated in the FOIA response to me, there are bigger issues because she has indicated she is an Advisor to the Board, which is different than being a board member.
Who is on first?
Only in Shelby County!
