The Marshall County Commissioners and Council are still deliberating the matter of legal and advertising fees incurred by the Plan Commission (PC) and Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), the legality of limiting their access to legal counsel, and how to fund expenses incurred for the remainder of 2024 whether those expenses be pre-authorized or not.
As previously reported, on June 13th, the Council denied an additional appropriations request made by Plan Director Ty Adley for legal fees and advertising. The Council did create new line items within their own budget to fund those expenses with the stipulation that they be pre-approved through President Jesse Bohannon before expenses are incurred.
Since that decision was approved, Commissioner Attorney Jim Clevenger and the Commissioners have discussed the legality of that decision.
Also since that decision additional expenses have been incurred that were not pre-authorized by Bohannon including attendance by Attorney Derek Jones at a Plan Commission meeting on June 27th.
Prior to the July Council meeting on Thursday July 11th, Bohannon sent an email to the Council that stated: “All, I just got a request to approve a claim for Planning legal that I did not approve. Actually, I denied the only legal-related request that I was given, as I shared at last meeting. We will need to take a look at this tonight and discuss how to proceed.” To that email he attached an invoice for Legal Services from Jones Huff & Jones submitted to Marshall County Plan Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals for legal work conducted by (Derek) Jones with a total balance due of $2,895.99.
During the July Council meeting, Bohannon advised the Council that he had logged in to the SBS Portal to review invoices and noted that some of those additional expenses were incurred prior to the June 13th meeting; so even though they are beyond the Department’s 2024 approved budget, the County is still obligated to pay them.
Bohannon advised the Council that approximately $900 of the invoice was spent between June 17th and June 27th which was after the June 13th decision was made to require pre-authorization. One of the expenses incurred was in the amount of $540 for 3.6 hours for Jones to attend the June 27th Plan Commission meeting. Bohannon explained to the Council that he did not approve Adley’s request to have Jones present at that meeting. Bohannon added that he noted on the denial form that if he wanted that request approved Adley would be required to ask the full Council. “It looks like he went ahead and spent that money. I don’t know what to do at this point.” Bohannon stated.
Council Attorney Marcel Lebbin advised the Council that they are not legally obligated to pay those additional expenses that did not receive prior authorization.
Councilwoman Nicole Cox recommended that the Council table the issue, ask more questions, and find out what possible consequences the involved parties face in the matter.
Councilman Will Patterson questioned Adley’s potential liability in the matter.
Lebbin could not give a clear answer to Adley’s potential liability and noted that in local governments where the relationship between the Commissioners and Council is healthy – both bodies work together to resolve issues. Lebbin recommended that the Council have a conversation with the Commissioners regarding how they want to move forward. Based on that response the Council can then take action based on that feedback.
Bohannon asked if the Commissioners could pay the fees out of the Commissioner’s legal budget and what the Council’s response should be if the Commissioners choose to fund something that the Council has clearly indicated they do not want funded as it pertains to solar and battery energy storage systems (BESS).
Bohannon suggested that if employees are allowed to determine their own spending outside of approved budgets and authorizations; there would be a descent into chaos.
Lebbin said that if the Commissioners do decide to pay these fees that were not pre-authorized by Bohannon and the Council; the Council could have the Commissioners audited. The Commissioners Budget could also be restricted if they do not follow necessary guidelines by paying for every expense through the appropriate fund.
Lebbin concluded that he hoped there would be cooperation between the governing bodies and that this could be worked out together. If not; other action can be taken. The Statutes are clear that the Council sets the budget; not the Commissioners. Lebbin suggested that the Commissioners would be usurping the Council’s authority by funding activities not approved or supported by the Council; but noted that navigating that situation is not as clear cut as many would like it to be.
Lebbin added that the issue goes beyond solar and BESS because money is finite. Financial support has to come from specific funds to be used for requests and expenditures. Any money used from anywhere is money that cannot be used somewhere else. Lebbin emphasized a need for the Commissioners and the Council to work together and respect each other’s authority.
Bohannon asked Lebbin to follow up with Jones to ensure that he is aware of the position of the Council.
Cox made an official motion to table the invoice to enable the Council to look in to the matter further.
The matter was again addressed during the Commissioners meeting on Monday, July 15th; Bohannon and Cox approached the Commissioners during the meeting during Public Comment.
Bohannon informed the Commissioners of what he described as a “developing situation” regarding the Planning Department’s Budget and updated the Commissioners on the process approved by the Council for incurring additional expenses for legal and advertising including the requirement that those requests be pre-authorized on a case by case basis.
According to Bohannon, several requests were approved but not all. He informed the Commissioners that the Planning Department has incurred $900 in unauthorized legal expenses including the $540 which was specifically denied.
According to Bohannon, Lebbin contacted Jones to make him aware that additional legal expenses must be pre-authorized. According to Bohannon, Jones informed Lebbin that he was aware of the system put in place. Bohannon said that he believed Jones and the leadership at the Planning Department is putting the County in a bad position.
Cox cautioned, “They are setting a precedent for other Department Heads as well.”
Clevenger illustrated that the Plan Commission is a separate statutorily established Commission which includes the right to have legal counsel at its choosing. Clevenger questioned the legality of the Council to impose these restrictions on the Plan Commission.
Bohannon informed the Commissioners that additional appropriations have been granted for everything that is urgent and necessary, but the work they are engaging in to develop additional ordinances is work that can be delayed until 2025.
Bohannon also stated that he advised Adley that if he would like to submit a request for that additional work in his budget request for 2025 that it would be completely appropriate to do so.
Clevenger said, “You are putting Mr. Adley in an impossible position.”
Cox stated, “We need to have a conversation another time because you’re involved as well.”
Bohannon concluded that he wanted the Commissioners aware of the situation and that he does not believe the Council is prepared to allow Department Heads to spend beyond their budget and put the County in a position to pay for additional expenses incurred that are not authorized.
