Trending
WARREN -- The two judges charged with overseeing the Mahoning Valley Sanitary District have a few questions and would like some answers before they put their stamp of approval on an MVSD resolution to refund some $5 million to the cities of Youngstown and Niles and the village of McDonald.
In a memo to attorney Tom Wilson, MVSD legal counsel, signed by both Mahoning County Common Pleas Judge Lou A. D'Apolito and Trumbull County Common Pleas Judge Ronald J. Rice, the judges wrote they would like to see a written opinion that the act to transfer funds is permissible.
"We need to see written opinion letters from the Ohio Attorney General and / or the Ohio Auditor or some other governmental agency, such as the prosecutors of Trumbull and Mahoning counties," the memo states.
MVSD board chairman Matthew Blair said he hasn't seen the memo, but confirmed the board had asked for a hearing before the two judges who hold jurisdiction over the district even though the board already had taken action on the refunds.
Blair said the county prosecutors do not hold jurisdiction over the MVSD to offer an opinion.
The MVSD board last month unanimously passed the resolution to refund its surplus fund of $5 million to the cities of Youngstown and Niles and the village of McDonald. Youngstown will receive $3.7 million, Niles will receive $1.2 million and McDonald will receive $100,000.
Blair said the refunds came after the recommendation of both MVSD legal counsel Wilson and its financial advisers Public Fund Management (PFM) of Cleveland.
"They both said (the refunds) would be financially prudent," Blair said.
Money was to be distributed in three increments of $2 million on June 30, $2 million on Sept. 30 and $1 million on Dec. 31.
In the memo, which was not dated, the judge listed more than a dozen questions dealing with the issue. One of the questions asked what is the actual mission statement of the MVSD and does the MVSD bylaws permit a return of funds.
"Who exactly does the MVSD represent, the cities, the taxpayers, the end water users and why?" the memo asks.
Blair said the MVSD was established by Section 6115 of the Ohio Revised Code.
The judges also question whether current MVSD board members have fiduciary obligations to pay off any debts first, and if any board member has a potential conflict of interest in voting for this refund.
"If there are surplus funds, is the MVSD over charging for what it does?" the memo asks. "Is there a rainy day fund for the MVSD and if not, why?"
The judges also questioned the financial sense of the board, questioning if the money could be better used for future MVSD needs like dam repairs. And if a hearing before them is scheduled, the judges said representatives of all the communities that use MVSD water should be included.
"Why are other communities such as Poland and Austintown not sharing in the funds based upon surcharges to them?" the memo states.
Blair said he would rather not answer those questions until actually seeing the memo.
A call placed to Wilson's office last week was not returned.
gvogrin@tribtoday.com