2. If the OECs opinion is ‘Yes to recuse herself’, is she prohibited from participating in any activity
available to any other private citizen including appearing before the PC or any other City of Hudson
agency to offer testimony.
Ms. Jones stated she does not have all the information necessary to fully and properly analyze whether she must
recuse herself. If she makes the decision prior to having all of the information it potentially causes her to violate
her oath to fully and fairly uphold her duties as a PC member. Notably any violation of the Ohio ethics laws carry
potential civil and criminal penalties, however, the OEC advisory opinion states that any public official that
follows an OEC advisory opinion is immune from penalties.
Ms. Jones submitted a request to the OEC to issue an advisory opinion on August 13, 2023. The OEC indicated
that it currently issues an opinion within 45 days of receipt of the request. She deferred to her fellow
Commissioners as to how they wished to proceed.
Mr. John P. Slagter, Tucker Ellis, LLP, stated since Ms. Jones lives at the adjacent property his concerns are
ethical issues and due process. He also noted Ms. Jones’ husband testified at the previous meeting regarding this
application. He requested Ms. Jones recuse herself and noted it will be raised as an objection should she decline
to recuse herself. Mr. Slagter also noted this is step one of the process which is for PC to review and comment on
the plan, prior to scheduling a Public Hearing where citizens have the right to speak.
Chair Stolle again stated everyone at the meeting will be permitted to speak. He also stated that no vote will be
taken but the Commissioners' comments will be heard.
Ms. Jones discussed Mr. Slagter’s comments and stated she could not in good faith recuse herself at that time
because she did not have all the information at the time.
Ms. Norman expressed her opinion that the LDC is inartfully written and is one of the causes of the confusion
during this meeting. Ms. Norman also agrees this is a meeting not a hearing, which reduces the requirements on
PC to hear from the public. She also stated a better course of action might be to delay this meeting to allow Ms.
Jones to receive guidance from the OEC.
Mr. Vaughan requested staff comment on the timeline obligations if the discussion is deferred and stated he
would like a decision from the OEC prior to holding this meeting.
Mr. Slagter stated the applicant would like to continue the process tonight and the possibility of Ms. Jones
abstaining as a PC member and be free to comment as a private citizen. Mr. Slagter stated he will not waive any
conflict of interest regarding Ms. Jones participating in the meeting as a Commissioner. Ms. Jones stated that she
could not recuse herself at the time of the meeting because she does not have and could not have had all the
information to make a final decision and cannot testify as a private citizen if she is on the PC.
Ms. Norman reminded the PC that Ms. Jones is the only representative of Ward 3 and has requested information
from the OEC. The Commission discussed continuing the meeting to a future date.
The Commissioners and staff reviewed and discussed 1203.02 and the 120 days after the application is complete
in which PC shall consider the application and take final action. Mr. Sugar noted the date the completed
application was submitted was July 17, 2023.
Ms. Noman made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nystrom, to defer the Compatibility Meeting to
the October 9, 2023, Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the Ohio Ethics
Commission to render an opinion regarding Ms. Jones conflict of interest.
Ms. Jones recused herself from voting upon, and did not vote upon, this specific motion.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye:
5 - Ms. Norman, Mr. Nystrom, Mr. Stolle, Mr. Vaughan and Mr. Romano
