Okay, now before anyone starts attacking with the usual half-truths and innuendos, please allow me to post something that you can find in any number of Public Service bulletins and pamphlets published by a variety of civic and quasi-governmental organizations throughout Ohio.:

The Ohio attorney general has established seven questions to ask when the issue of compatibility is raised. All seven must be answered, “no.” If one of the questions is answered “yes,” the positions are incompatible.

The questions are:

1. Is either of the positions classified employment within the terms of RC 124.57?

2. Do the empowering statutes of either position limit permissible outside employment?

3. Is one office subordinate to, or in any way a check upon, the other?

4. Is it physically impossible for one person to discharge the duties of both positions?

5. Is there a conflict of interest between the two positions?

6. Are there local charter provisions or ordinances which are controlling?

7. Is there a federal, state or local department regulation applicable?

If you are a public employee or hold another public office, please check with your county prosecutor, city law director or the Ohio attorney general’s office to determine if a conflict exists.

I am positive that these seven qualifying questions have been used by all Ohio Attorneys General for the last twenty-five years with the possible exception of the present Administration’s Attorneys General. (I am not saying that they have NOT been used by these AOGs, I am saying that I am not “certain” that they HAVE been.)

So, unlike my critics usually claim, I am NOT “the ONLY ONE who believes these notions.” I am merely one of the LEGIONS that agree with the Ohio Attorneys General of the modern era!!!

In Middletown, in the cases of nearly every member of every board or commission appointed by the Middletown City Council, Question #3, “Is one office subordinate to, or in any way a check upon, the other?” must be answered: “YES!” This is obvious because every one of these boards and commissions:

1. Reports to City Council;

2. Relies upon City Council for the appropriation of any funds required;

3. Relies upon City Council to award any required contracts or to purchase any required goods, services, equipment, or materials; or

4. Members serve at the pleasure of City Council.

Now, one thing is completely obvious! It would be very easy for nearly any city official to “Shut Mike Presta’s big mouth!“ How? Simple, but a common, lowly citizen cannot do it!!! The City Law Director could do it. The City Manager could do it. Our good Mayor Lawrence P. Mulligan, Jr. himself could do it! In fact, any one of the six members of City Council could do it! Even the ones who are NOT practicing attorneys could do it. (And even the ones who have NOT promised NOT to accept appointments to such boards and commissions, but did so anyway, could do it!)

All they have to do is sit down and write a short, simple little letter to the Ohio Attorney General asking for an Opinion. (In fact, any of those same public officials could even instead write the letter to the Ohio Ethics Commission for a very similar, but less weighty “opinion”.)

Yes, that is all that needs to be done, and soon after (usually within ninety days) the answer would come back, they could copy me, and tell me to shut my big, fat mouth FOREVER!!!

And I’ve been suggesting that they do exactly that for over five years now, but they never do.

When is “City Council” not “City Council”???

All of the little signs read “COUNCIL MEMBER”. The story in The Middletown Journal with the headline:

“Sweeping reforms ahead for Section 8” and the sub-header: