Given that Bill Todd is a lawyer, you’d think he’d take a look at the law i.e. the relevant Ohio Revised Code (ORC) sections prior to throwing out accusations against the Strickland administration and Mayor Michael Coleman.

Here’s the video from yesterday
billtoddspeaks.JPG

In it, Bill Todd claims that Mayor Coleman hired his own wife while serving as the voluntary chair for Strickland’s transition team. But, according to the ORC (Sec. 107.29 Gubernatorial transition committee), the voluntary chair has no hire/fire authority- he merely assists with recommendations for cabinet-level appointments.

Bill Todd also charges that the Strickland administration and Mayor Coleman are stonewalling his Freedom of Information request even though the ORC provides the state 30 days to reply. It’s been one week.

It also seems worth mentioning that Frankie Coleman has over twenty years experience in human resources and workforce development- but Bill Todd charges she had no business being hired because she was not “eligible, competent or qualified.”

So did Bill Todd fail to do his research? Or is he just a big, fat liar?

 
  • note: I didn’t edit that picture. His head REALLY is that small.

  • To answer the question posed by the title of this entry… both?

    That is one tiny head, BTW. I’m surprised he can find shirts that fit properly.

  • Brian

    Does the ORC really allow 30 days to fulfill a public records request?

    I had thought it only said “a reasonable time,” which the courts have since interpreted to mean 14 days at the most.

    It’s still not been that long, but I’d bet that the request could have been satisfied by now.

  • bryan

    the courts have given wide latitude to public agencies when a public records request is extremely complex.

    in my experience, 30 days is considered a reasonable time for a complex records request such as Bill Todd’s.

    Relevant caselaw:

    66 State ex rel. Consumer News Services, Inc. v. Worthington Board of Education (2002), 97 Ohio St.3d 58, 2002 Ohio 5311 (Promptness is to be
    determined based of the facts and circumstances of the case.); see State ex rel. Wadd v. City of Cleveland (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 50, 1998 Ohio
    444, 689 N.E.2d 25.
    67 State ex rel. Taxpayers Coalition v. City of Lakewood (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 385, 1999 Ohio 114, 715 N.E.2d 179 (seven days for attorney to
    review documents is appropriate); State ex rel. Warren Newspapers, Inc. v. Hutson (1994), 70 Ohio St.3d 619, 623, 640 N.E.2d 174, 178.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!