Editor’s Note: Events in this story took place prior to reinstatement of Steve Andrews as executive director of the Mansfield Metropolitan Housing Authority during a meeting on March 3.
MANSFIELD — Judge Brent Robinson has barred two board members of the Mansfield Metropolitan Housing Authority from voting in future meetings until a lawsuit against them is decided.
In a judgment entry filed Feb. 28, Robinson granted Mansfield Mayor Tim Theaker’s request to for preliminary injunctive relief against his appointees, Debra Chase and Isoleen Dunn. A representative from Robinson’s court said the order could be changed or upheld after a final hearing on March 17.
Robinson issued the ruling based on nearly five hours of testimony, exhibits and case law presented in the Richland County Common Pleas Court on Feb. 21. The preliminary injunction was the first of two hearings in a lawsuit filed by Theaker in an effort to remove Chase and Dunn from the board.
The Feb. 28 judgment entry states that the court found “clear and convincing evidence” that plaintiff (Theaker) will prevail during during the final hearing and that barring the board members from voting serves the public interest and possibly prevents “irreparable harm.”
Theaker re-appointed Chase and Dunn to five-year terms on the board in 2021 and 2022, respectively. In January, he asked them both to resign and threatened to take legal action if they did not do so voluntarily.
A final trial on the merits of the case is scheduled for March 17 at 9 a.m. The evidence already presented at the preliminary injunction hearing will become part of the record at trial.
MMHA board members are not paid in accordance with Ohio Revised Code. Dunn said she chose not to resign because she didn’t do anything wrong.
“This bit about the board being dysfunctional and all the publicity that was in the paper and the slams that have been made against myself — that’s why I’m here. I was wondering if somebody was writing a fiction book about me,” she said.
“That’s why I’m here and wanted to stay on the board. It makes it look as if I’m guilty of something and I’m not guilty of anything.”
Dunn later said her sense of what’s right drives her decision-making on the board.
“I was put on that board to do things for the community, not to please the director or the other board members. I have a conscience,” she said. “I was not going to vote in agreeance with something that I did not feel was right.”
Chase made similar statements.
“You’re acting like we’re vicious criminals when we’re not,” she said. “What I believe in is to help the people. That’s my whole purpose.”
“I still believe in the people, making sure they’re not out in the cold or hungry.”
Spon: ‘Millions’ of dollars in low-income housing funds at risk
Mansfield Law Director John Spon is representing Theaker in the case. He argued Dunn and Chase put the agency at risk of losing millions of dollars in grants and tax credits for a new, low-income housing development project by refusing to approve meeting minutes and financials for several months last year.
After a contested vote in August, the board failed to approve meeting minutes, agency finances and treasurer’s reports for months. Witnesses testified that Dunn and Chase repeatedly voted down approval or chose not to vote. Both joined the other board members in approving the bills and financial reports in December.
Meeting minutes still have not been approved since August.
Then-executive director Steve Andrews said after the December meeting that the board’s actions could lead to findings during the state’s annual audit of the agency. Findings could lead to stricter state oversight of the agency’s financials and hurt its reputation with lenders, jeopardizing current and future projects.
“It red flags us for any kind of commercial venture or any loans that we would ever want to take out,” he explained.
On Jan. 24, Dunn, Chase and a third board member Sarah Hairston voted to terminate Andrews’ contract, despite questions about Chase’s ability to serve on the board.
One day earlier, Theaker wrote a letter to Chase informing her that she did not qualify to serve on the board and he was removing her effective immediately. Chase denied receiving the letter at the time of the meeting.
Andrews had been in charge of development efforts within the agency, including the 4-percent tax credit application.
Stephanie Hartzler, a 24-year employee of the agency who is currently acting executive director, said her expertise is in compliance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. Her role in the agency has always focused on housing assistance, not development.
Nevertheless, she is continuing the application process.
“I don’t have a detailed knowledge (of tax credits),” she said. “Steve knew what he was doing when it came to development. He knew what questions to ask.
“If Steve doesn’t come back, I’m going to be making a lot of phone calls.”
Dunn and Chase, who represented themselves in court, argued they had done nothing wrong and claimed Andrews did not adequately inform the board of the agency’s efforts to obtain funding and tax credits.
“Part of his duties are to let the board know about finances and projects and that was not happening,” Dunn said. “They had not brought to the board that (this) kind of money was out there and they were trying to get it by March.”
Hartzler testified that the board had been informed of the general nature of the project, but not in great detail.
The conflict regarding the August minutes stems from Andrew’s decision to restructure the agency by creating two new deputy director positions.
To carry out the change, Andrews requested a budget increase of $18,000 to cover increased employee compensation and benefits. A recording of the meeting confirms the vote passed 3-2 after a lengthy discussion. Unapproved meeting minutes list board members Kathy Shambre, Ron Biddle and Dunn voting in favor.
In court, Dunn testified she has not voted to approve August meeting minutes because she doesn’t agree with them.
“If I would have approved (the minutes), that was saying that I agreed with the way they were written up and what was going on and I didn’t,” she said.
“If the board does not assume their responsibilities and lets the director just do anything that they want to do, the board is responsible for it.”
Dunn declined to state specifically what she didn’t agree with about the meeting minutes, saying it had been discussed in executive session.
Hairston testified that the board didn’t vote on financial matters because they “couldn’t get through” discussions about meeting minutes during the months of October and November. She claims the issue was resolved after attorney Andrew Burton advised board members they could vote on financials separately from meeting minutes.
Chase’s eligibility questioned
Spon also argued that Chase, who was appointed as the board’s metro housing resident member, is not legally qualified to be on the board because she no longer resides in housing owned or managed by the authority.
Ohio law doesn’t specify whether metropolitan housing authority board members can be removed from office or the procedure for doing so.
The one exception is Ohio Revised Code 3735.27 (F)(1), which states that if the board’s resident member no longer qualifies as a resident, another resident member shall be appointed to serve the unexpired portion of that term.
Under the Ohio Revised Code, Theaker is required to appoint one board member who is a resident of a dwelling unit owned or managed by the authority.
Theaker told the court he believed Chase was a metro resident when he reappointed her in 2021.
Chase testified that she has lived at her current residence for nearly 14 years and that it hasn’t been owned or managed by the MMHA during that time. She also told the court she wasn’t aware she was supposed to be the board’s metro resident.
“I never knew there was such a rule. Nobody’s ever explained that to us,” she said. “I should have been informed of these rules by the board.”
Chase questioned why she should have to resign, placing the blame for the mistake on Theaker.
“How can you accidentally (appoint) me twice?” she said.
Theaker also said he re-appointed Chase and Dunn at the request of the agency’s former interim director, Stan Popp.
“The interim director did not want to do any investigation as to finding out who would or should be on the board. He just advised me through an email saying, ‘Please reappoint them as your appointees,’ ” Theaker recalled.
Hairston, whom Dunn called as a witness, testified that she is a metropolitan housing resident and believed she filled the representative requirement under federal guidelines.
Chase testified that she had considered stepping down following the mayor’s request, but changed her mind.
She said she understood the law but would rather be represented in court before handing in her resignation.
“Give me one reason why you believe you have a legal right to remain on the board,” Spon asked while Chase was on the witness stand.
“I haven’t really done anything wrong,” she answered.
