Latest / Brian Thomas / The "Smither-vent" - Episode 121 - The Secrecy of Executive Sessions

Transcript

The "Smither-vent" - Episode 121 - The Secrecy of Executive Sessions · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: A very happy one to you. A comping up off
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: the top of the our news. We'll hear from Greg Hand.
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: He's a local historian and comedian. Similarities between twenty County
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: or since an in twenty twenty six and nineteen twenty six,
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: Tom's Awastowski fast forward one hour. Got a variety of
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: state topics to talk about with him, the Ohio, Minnesota,
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: Somali daycare fraud link, et cetera. In the meantime, welcome back,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: volume two. We're making this a habit. Christopher Smith and
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: former virus mayor of the City of SINCINNTI with the
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Smither event. Christopher, your reaction to council, Yes, going into
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: executive session and note not speaking a word to the press,
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: not a single council member, the city manager, the city
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: manager spokesperson, the mayor. Nothing. We have no idea what happened, Christopher.
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: Welcome back, my friend. It's always great having you on.
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: Hey, thank you so much. It's everything that's wrong with government.
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: Brian Thomas, you know of one to go into executive
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: session and not tell the public the agenda of the
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: executive session. Yeah, that's right, that's a good session. You're
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: supposed to say this is the reason we're going into
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: executive session and our discussion is very narrow. I mean,
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: you tell the public the agenda because you don't want to.
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: You don't want to say, we're going into executive session
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: and we're going to talking about all of these other things, right,
• 1:11
  Speaker 2: so to go and just deal with that issue. But
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: the public should have been informed prior to the executive session,
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: and there should have been a roll call vote of
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: all non members of council of what the agenda was.
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: It's all secrecy and it's all intentional for our city
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: government to conceal their discussions with the settlement talks with
• 1:34
  Speaker 2: the Hinton family.
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: Well, Christopher, you know, based on what you said, they
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: could have been talking about something completely different. We've all
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: been operating into the presumption that the closed door meeting
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: was in as a consequence of the revelations that there
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: were settlement discussions going on behind the scenes between the
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: city manager and the Hinting attorneys. Neither of those sides
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: denied discussions were ongoing. I think they just most argued
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: with the characterization in the media. But that's what the
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: predicate was. Well, presumably that's what they went in there for.
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: But we really don't even know that, do we.
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: We don't. If I were a lawyer, I would be
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: filing a lawsuit against the City of Cincinnati today asking
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: for the agenda. What was the agenda of the executive session.
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: You don't have to tell me what you discussed, there
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: are no notes, but you at least have to tell
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: the public what the agenda was. You can't just go
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: into secrecy as a government, close the doors and not
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: tell the taxpayers who are by the way, the ones
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: who are on the hook to pay the bill, what
• 2:37
  Speaker 2: you're talking about. But this is the secrecy of this mayor,
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: this manager, and this council, and elections have consequences. My
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: heart goes out to every law enforcement officer that's out
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: there because I wanted to share, which I know you covered, Brian.
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: Is this is the case last year where the young
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: man had a gun and a stolen car running from
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: an officer. He was African American, the officer involved was white.
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: That young man turned with a weapon and unfortunately that
• 3:14
  Speaker 2: officer had to take his life for fear of his
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: own life. We've had the prosecutor clear him. They have
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: much economy. Prosecutor clear him obviously, we have the Cincinnati
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: Police Department clear him. The bottom line was, my heart
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: goes out to any loss of life. But the officer
• 3:34
  Speaker 2: made a split second decision, which is what they have
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: to do every single day. The hitting family. The father
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: then decided the next day he was going to take
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: his vehicle and run over a sheriff. A sheriff who
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: has nothing to do with the Cincinnati Police Department. He's
• 3:53
  Speaker 2: out there, he had adopted a couple of children. He's
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: out there, had retired doing traffic at a at a
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: UC graduation, and the father ran him over. This council
• 4:07
  Speaker 2: went into executive session most likely to discuss a settlement
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: to the family because their child was shot, who had
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: a gun in a stolen car running from an officer.
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: And that is what is so sad about all of this.
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: If I were a taxpayer, if I were a lawyer,
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: I would be filing a lawsuit today demanding what the
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: agenda was of that executive session.
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: And so to be clear on this and let me
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: leave no question mark to go into executive session, there
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: is a rule an obligation for counsel to let the
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: public know the subject matter of the executive session and
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: that did not happen yesterday before they went in.
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: That's that's my understanding.
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: Well, you were a former vice mantic.
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: Oh no, that's the truth. Oh no, that's the truth.
• 4:58
  Speaker 2: But the question is if no one can calls you
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: on it. That's why lawsuits after the attorney, because people
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: do things that are illegal and they get away with it.
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: The question is, will counsel in a transparent way communicate
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: with the public why they went into executive session. So
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: for example, for example, I sit as one commissioner appointed
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: by the governor over the casinos for the state of Ohio. Okay,
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: we went into executive session approximately two months ago, all right,
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: roll call vote of all seven commissioners and an agenda
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: item of what we were going to discuss. We were
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: being sued in our capacity as commissioners, and we communicated
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: we're going into executive session so our lawyer can brief
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: fund right on that litigation. That's why we went into
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: executive session. And guess what, when we went into executive session,
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: we only discussed that agenda item and then came out
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: of executive session and brought the public back in.
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: That's the way it's you do. That's the way it's
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: supposed to work, and knowing full well that that's the
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: way it's supposed to work, why did the city take
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: us down this road which might lead to even more
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: litigation and more legal expenses. Let's pause when Christopher smith'ment
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: back six point thirty seven right now, if you have
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: kerr CE the talk station, well, if this sounds like you,
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: SI fifty five KRCD talk station, bran Town was reacting
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: with Christophers Smith aman reacting to the behind the closed
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: doors meeting. So, going back to Christopher's point, it is
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: an obligation of the council rules that they let the
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: public know what a closed door session is all about,
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: because we don't get any information from inside the closed
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: door session. So it is a critically important obligation for counsel.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: Chris said, it's so much so that someone could file
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: a lawsuit for them having violated that because we presume
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: they were talking about this Hinton settlement, but we don't
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: know that for sure. Obviously the lid was blown off.
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: I think much of the Sagrantah Cheryl Long and the
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: Hitting family lawyers that it was released to the public
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: that they were talking about settlement. We know they were
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: but we don't know that that's what happened yesterday, Christopher.
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: With the rule being what it is, and the fact
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: that they've gone down this road before they bought litigation
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: under your scenario, they knew it was going to happen,
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: so they subjected the sinsin taxpayer to even more expense
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: because now we're going to litigate the failure to let
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: us know what's going on in executive session.
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Now, again, I'm going to go back and let
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: me make this point too, which I think is interesting.
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: When I served on council, right I never remember ever
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: going into executive session. I want to emphasize that to you.
• 7:37
  Speaker 2: So that last ten year run that I served, I
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: never remember council going into executive session. Okay, so this
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: is very unusual for city Council to say I'm going
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: into executive session. It could be that they don't even
• 7:55
  Speaker 2: understand meaning When I served right now currently as one
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: of seven commissioners for casinos across the state of Ohio,
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: again we went into executive session. We each of us
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: had to do a roll call vote. The seven of us,
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: we all had to sign a document saying we were
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: going into executive session, and we had to stick to
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: that agenda item and come out of executive session. When
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: you're dealing with the government and the people's money, it
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: just makes logical common sense to think. Number one, you
• 8:29
  Speaker 2: don't go into executive session lightly. But when you go
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: into executive session and you close the door, you have
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: to at least tell the public why you're going into
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: executive session, the purpose of it. You don't have to
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: tell us what you said. There are no notes, you
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: don't have to say what was discussed. You know, da
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: da da da dad between your lawyer, the city manager
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: and the nine members of council. But you do have
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: to tell us the agenda.
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: Well, and you just pointed out a reason why you
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: needed exactecutive session. Private conversations, attorney client communications you've got
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: to have with a larger group of people being represented
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: by that council. That is not the type of information
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: that you generally want shared with the general public. You
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: can't be candid and open with your lawyer if you
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: know it's going to be widely reported. So that will
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: be a valid justification. But what of a discussion about settlement.
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: Is that a worthy executive session declaration? Had they gone
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: in ahead of time and said we are going into
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: executive session to discuss the settlement. Is that akin to
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: the attorney client privileged kind of conversation. Would it serve
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: as a justification?
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: I don't think so. I mean, the non members of
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: council are not being sued. The people who are going
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: to pay the bill are the tax payers, so they
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: deserve to know what that bill's going to look like.
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: You're not going into executive session saying, hey, you're being sued,
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: you might be deposed. Here's you know, here's your here's
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: here's our position. I mean, you're a lawyer. Our only
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: discussion in that executive session was to discuss the legal
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: ramifications of those seven members. That's it. It's a very
• 10:13
  Speaker 2: narrow discussion. And I want to remind you we all
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: took a vote, we all signed a document, and we
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: stuck to that agenda item. So I don't know what
• 10:21
  Speaker 2: this new way stuff City Hall is doing, but I'm
• 10:24
  Speaker 2: sharing with you. Just just everybody use your common sense.
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: The government is supposed to be open. That's why you
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: have UH rules and law state rules that say, hey,
• 10:36
  Speaker 2: you can't five members of council can't just go out.
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: That was the Gang of fire. You just can't go
• 10:41
  Speaker 2: out and start having private meeting that lunch discussing the agenda. Right.
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: It was all about open access to public discussion, right.
• 10:50
  Speaker 2: So it's it's very important and I think that if
• 10:54
  Speaker 2: council did not tell us why they're what their agenda was,
• 10:58
  Speaker 2: not what they discussed, that is absolutely a problem period.
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: And go back on the fact pattern here. This is
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: why law enforcement, Brian Thomas, when we're dealing with ice,
• 11:09
  Speaker 2: We've got people across the country who are standing in
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: front of police vehicles. They're blocking a law enforcement cars
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: in whether it's ice or whether it's a local police
• 11:20
  Speaker 2: officer who's being ambushed while sitting in their car eating
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: lunch in uniform, out of uniform. We're seeing this all
• 11:28
  Speaker 2: across the United States of America. My point is that
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: the meat of this is a young man who made
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: a series of poor decisions gun stolen car, jumping out
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: of the car, running from an officer, turning towards that officer,
• 11:46
  Speaker 2: and the officer unfortunately having to make that decision to
• 11:50
  Speaker 2: fire his weapon and take his life. That's what we're discussing.
• 11:55
  Speaker 2: How do you think, Brian Thomas, if this council settles
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: this lawsuit and gives it family money after the father
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: made the decision the next day to kill a sheriff.
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: How in the world, what kind of message? How do
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: you think that impacts the morale of every peace officer
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: in the state of Ohio and across the country.
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: Well, let me just leave that lay there. I understand
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: that's more of a rhetorical question, but I'll bring it
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: right back and just get a quick comment about Alex Trevinsky,
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: who was cited for defending himself from the beatdown brawl.
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: And how do you think that makes officers feel when
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: they don't want to issue a citation because they don't
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: see any crime committed. And yet we're apparently forced to
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: bring Christopher back real quick on that one. First, Susette
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: Low's camp for all your mortgage needs. You are the
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: best possible hands with Susette. You will love working with her.
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: She's withus. Christopher Smithman on the phone. Christopher just pivoting
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: over briefly to the trial of Alex Trevinsky, who is
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: the slap guy in the multiple beatdown. He was charged
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: with disorderly conduct, which carries up to thirty days in
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: jail on a twohundred fifty dollars fine. The other seven
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: people were charged with felonies, including the one who punched
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: Holly in the face so hard and knocked her out.
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: Unbelievable that now Alex got a charge against him with
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: this disorderly conduct in spite of the fact that the
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: officers on the scene did not believe that charge was
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: motivated or necessary, there weren't sufficient facts there, and yet
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: ultimately I believe it was Lieutenant Henny now police chief.
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: Henny ended up issuing the citation to Henny at apparently
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: the behest of I don't know was it the city manager,
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: but it wasn't something that any of the members of
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: law enforcement wanted to do, yet he issued it. Now
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: he's been caught. Henny has been caught as a defense witness,
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: as have been the police detectives in Alex Stravinski's trial.
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: So with yesterday's continuance, because the city prosecutors said one
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: of her witnesses didn't show up, I think that's an
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: illustration or a suggestion that the case is going to
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: ultimately be dismissed because if he doesn't show up the
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: next time, they throw the case out. Maybe that's been
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: set up to just have that result because the case
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: isn't going anywhere, Christopher. Your response, it's.
• 13:58
  Speaker 2: Not going anywhere. Clearly his lawyers have said, you know,
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: and I thought it was the right decision to say,
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: we're going to trial, like, we're not shopping the case,
• 14:08
  Speaker 2: We're not trying to settle anything, right, because part of
• 14:10
  Speaker 2: this is they've got to clear this man's name. I mean,
• 14:13
  Speaker 2: members of council, the city manager, everybody was out there
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: saying these crazy things about this man, and so you know,
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: his reputation absolutely was impacted, and his ability to get
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: a job to you know, all of that is going
• 14:30
  Speaker 2: to going to be on the table. Number One, he's
• 14:33
  Speaker 2: going to be found not guilty. This case is not
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: going anywhere. It's dead on a rival. You and I
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: know that. So the next question is going to be
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: his lawyer's going to turn around and file a lawsuit
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: against the City of Cincinnati. They're going to win that lawsuit, period,
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: and the city's going to have to give millions of dollars. Now,
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: if I am his lawyer and I just saw you
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: give out eight point one million, I then turn around
• 14:58
  Speaker 2: and say, oh, you're going to give the in family
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: millions of dollars. What do you think they're going to
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: have to give this man? See, they're setting this thing up, man.
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: And then when you look, you look at Chief Washington,
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: you look at Chief Fiji. Just go down the list
• 15:12
  Speaker 2: of people that they're going to have to subble with.
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: And I'm talking about in twenty twenty sixth and twenty
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: twenty seven, we're talking about an indemnity debt of probably
• 15:22
  Speaker 2: north of twenty million dollars in litigation. Again, I don't
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: know why they went into executive session yesterday, but they
• 15:31
  Speaker 2: owe us an explanation of what the agenda item was.
• 15:36
  Speaker 2: You know, I will make sure I end with that.
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: You and I shouldn't be speculating why our government went
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: behind closed doors. We should know why they went behind
• 15:46
  Speaker 2: closed doors. And so that point right there, I think
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: if we had a healthy media, if we had healthy journalism,
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: right they would be asking the questions that you and
• 15:58
  Speaker 2: I are talking about right now. Wouldn't just be all
• 16:01
  Speaker 2: Council went into executive session and there's no need for
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: us to know what our government was talking about behind
• 16:06
  Speaker 2: closed doors. Somebody would have already asked that question, and
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: the headline should have said something like counsel went into
• 16:13
  Speaker 2: executive session without sharing what the agenda was.
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: Exclamation point, Christopher Smithman. Always appreciate your thoughts and comments
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: and insights. We will patiently wait for local news to
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: find out why exactly they went into executive session. You know,
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: I guess members of Council are free to at least
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: give us that little piece of information without violating rules
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: about what goes on inside executive session. Right, so there's
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: a whole bunch of them out there that can answer
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: the question. Strange the administration wants to continue this cloak
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: and dagger nonsense. It certainly delegitimizes them. When you add
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: all these things together, you come up with an administration
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: that really wants to keep the truth away from the public.
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: No question, I can see. I can see Joe Strecker
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: sending an email to each member of members of Council
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: as a media person saying, I have one question, what
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: was your agenda item last night or yesterday afternoon? Why
• 17:05
  Speaker 2: did you go into executive session? No discussion about your agenda,
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: but what was the agenda? Yeah, he suspects these Something
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: tells me that there are going to be some emails
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: going to members of city council asking them that question.
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: Stet maybe, but according I mean Scott Wortman tried yesterday
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: after the meeting, they all declined to comment, along with
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: the city manager of the city managers spokesperson the mayor.
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: No one said anything. We'll see your popcorn out, Jay
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: Chris for Elections have consequences, don't they.
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: Elections have consequences. Brian Thomas, thank you so much. People
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: can follow me on x at vote Smitherman, thank you, brother.
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: Take care, my friend. We'll talk on Monday. Stick around.
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: On top of the other news, Greg Handy's local historian,
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: does some