It appears through public records requests MORE fraud has been found, or maybe someone can go on the record here to advise why they believe the latest bonds given to the public are not a fraud on the people? Key components to make effective, says here a probate Judge approves, so WHY are OUR Commissioners having other Judges sign?, that’s NOT what the law clearly defines.
Before entering upon the discharge of his duties each county commissioner shall give bond, signed by a bonding or surety company authorized to do business in this state, or, at his option, by two or more freeholders having real estate in the value of double the amount of the bond over and above all encumbrances to the state, in a sum not less than five thousand dollars, the surety company to be approved by the probate judge of the county, the bond conditioned for the faithful discharge of the commissioner’s official duties, and for the payment of any loss or damage that the county may sustain by reason of his failure in such duties. Such bond, with the oath of office and approval of the probate judge indorsed thereon, shall be deposited with the county treasurer and kept in his office. The expense or premium for such bond shall be paid by the board of county commissioners and charged to the general fund of the county. Such surety may be discharged in the manner provided by section 2109.18 of the Revised Code for the release of sureties of guardians.
Effective Date: 10-01-1953
Here are OUR Commissioners bonds, see any problems here?
Gary Utt Certificate not signed by Probate Judge Phil Mayor,signed by Common Pleas Heather Cockley? Not filed with the Clerk
Tim Wert Certificate not signed by Probate Judge Phil Mayor,signed by Common Pleas Judge DeWeese? Not filed with the Clerk
Marilyn Johns Certificate not signed by Probate Judge Phil Mayor,signed by Common Pleas Brent Robinson? – HMMM? – FILED WITH THE CLERK? – Why is it that 2 public records requests that 2 are not filed with the Clerk to make them effective, yet this one did?
Regardless of what we say, the LAW ORC- 305.04 CLEARLY states their bonds be approved by probate due to their familiarity of the LAW these bonds are required for. The questions that remain would be…does this have any bearing on the integrity of the executive office and can they pass a budget that is lawful IF their bonds are not effective as the law requires. Since THEY refuse to go on the record and threaten to have you arrested during a public records request as a way to intimidate the continued search for frauds filed in our Clerks office, could this be a hint of how much fraud they can get away with if nobody is accountable? If these things are TRUE, can it be said the latest EMERGENCY SALES TAX INCREASE to be lawful? These are continued issues we the people need to know, how ever the office continues to block the people from asking questions in their weekly meetings. It was interesting they were asked about these bonds in meeting June 2nd, 2015 yet called for executive session in which they told meeting attendees with exception the dog warden they had to go, what? I wasn’t there, but this is what I was advised – people had to leave their meeting? Executive Session means the 3 heads (Commissioners) go offline to discuss and come to agreement (They Leave) then come back to render a decision, NOT tell everyone to leave with exception of the dog warden – what the hell is that? Waiting on the minutes of this meeting to see how it all went down, none the less NOT how executive session works! Surely like they think, its protected by sunshine law?