Lorain County Judges Crowing with Chandra

June 19, 2014 at 11:42 am 6 comments

Judges in their robes always remind me of crows- and the poem

One for sorrow,
Two for mirth
Three for a wedding,
Four for birth
Five for silver,
Six for gold;
Seven for a secret,Not to be told;
Eight for heaven,
Nine for hell
And ten for the devil’s own sell! ( meaning selling ones soul to the devil)

Our current six crows –
Judge Betleski ( heard of him in the CRA debacle ?He knows how much his choice of Chandra will cost the taxpayer – he should – as he has been there done that with the CRA)- https://thatwoman.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/is-it-the-fish-that-stinks-or-the-company/
Judge Ewers, the Two Miraldis,
Judge Burge – has his own issues) http://chronicle.northcoastnow.com/2014/05/29/prosecutor-seeks-sweeping-ban-judge/
Judge Rothgery
have an issue with the Lorain County Commissioners and Lorain County Administrator .
Ted Kalo, Lori Kokoski, Tom Willams , Jim Cordes
Read the latest in response to the argument in this morning’s Chronicle Telegram- Evan Goodenow

“Just because somebody wants something doesn’t make it the right thing,” Kalo said.

Kokoski said department workers’ health and safety isn’t at risk in the building and they are exaggerating problems. She said photos of decrepit conditions are from areas where employees aren’t supposed to be.
“They’re trying to shame us into spending $2.8 million because they want what they want,” Kokoski said.

While the $1.2 million share of the cost of the move is about 2.2 percent of the $53 million county budget, Kokoski said the county can’t afford it.

“We would have to borrow that,” she said. “We don’t have money to fix our sidewalks.”

Williams said in an interview that the $50,000 requested Tuesday by the judges to hire a Cleveland law firm to sue the Board of Commissioners is just the start of a potentially costly legal battle. He estimated it could cost $500,000 for a settlement and $750,000 to $1 million if the case is resolved in court.

According to Tim Lubbe the Court Administrator who wrote the following in a replying email when I announced my displeasure of getting on the legal eagle train again.

Ms. Ritchey:

I have received your email and I can appreciate your sentiment. I would like to offer you some information which may provide a different perspective on this matter. This week Channel 3 and the Plain Dealer will be doing an expose on the working conditions to which the County Commissioners have relegated the Lorain County Adult Probation Department. I believe you will find these reports very illustrative of why we had to hire an attorney to address the deplorable conditions under which these employees must work. This link provides some pictures (taken in the last two weeks) of what these employees have been forced to endure. https://www.dropbox.com/sc/ea02qpuxqp24jme/AABBAOKr08J5Z-ktbPxcySpna

Certainly I have one perspective on this issue: to provide the Court’s employees with adequate space where they can perform their job on behalf of the Court and the citizens of Lorain County. I don’t believe that our employees should expect to work in extravagant facilities. However, they also should not have to withstand constant exposure to feces, mold, sewage and a physically unsafe environment. Ultimately, I would ask that before you conclude that Court is wasting taxpayer dollars you consider all the facts. Lubberes

1) For more than six years the Court has been trying to work with the Commissioners to remodel the old Courthouse so that it can meet the functional needs of the Probation Department. During this whole period, despite countless hours spent working up solutions and plans, the Commissioners have refused to implement a single improvement.

What’s more, as you can see from the pictures, not only have they failed to make this location serviceable, the deterioration which they have allowed to occur is beyond comprehension. Quite frankly if more citizens were aware of how poorly this County resource was “maintained” they would be appalled and demand action.

2) As a result of the lack of any progress in remodeling and repairing the old Courthouse, the Court began exploring other locations for the Probation Department. Almost two years ago the Court requested a meeting with all the County Commissioners to further discuss this problem. At that time all the Commissioners agreed that it was cost prohibitive to accomplish even the most basic repairs to the old Courthouse (estimates of 10 to 15 million dollars), let alone the remodeling which is essential for the Probation Department to efficiently perform their work.

The Court was of the opinion that locating the Probation Department on the undeveloped floor of the Justice Center (5th floor) was the most efficient, effective, practical and economical solution. The Commissioners proposed an old, dilapidated building on Broad Street. At the conclusion of the meeting both parties agreed to draw up plans for each location so that costs, benefits and disadvantages of each option could be considered.

It took the Commissioners more than a year to develop their plan with the projected costs being 1.2 million dollars. Of course during this time the neglect of the old Courthouse continued. The Court’s proposal for the 5th floor is projected to cost 2.4 million dollars.

If one were just to compare the numbers, without any critical analysis, the Commissioners’ plan would appear to be the better economical choice. Needless to say there is more to this decision than the simple numbers. It would take too long to cover all the issues associated with the various proposals, but a few examples include:

a. Age of the Broad Street facility results in increased and ongoing maintenance and utility costs

b. Additional security personnel must be employed at Broad Street location versus utilization of existing personnel at the Justice Center

c. Broad Street location involves less efficiency and increased personnel costs as Probation staff must go back and forth repeatedly throughout the day to the Justice Center
d. Negative impact on businesses in the areas around the Broad Street location with hundreds of loitering felons.

3) On May 2nd of this year the Court’s Administrative Judge appeared at the Commissioners’ meeting to discuss the various proposals (if you have not seen the meeting you can request a public records copy through the Commissioners). At that meeting it immediately became clear that despite the hours and money that went into developing a long-term solution for the County Probation Department, the Commissioners had no intention with proceeding with any type of plan (Commissioner Williams does agree that the Justice Center option is the more practical and fiscally prudent choice). According to the other Commissioners, they simply can’t afford to do anything. This is not only unacceptable, but untrue.
4) The Court has been more than patient in trying to work with the Commissioners. In fact, I personally am embarrassed that I have let staff, for whom I am responsible, continue to work in these deplorable conditions. Though I told myself that we didn’t want to waste money on a piecemeal solution and that if we persisted we could reach some compromise with the Commissioners. Clearly I was wrong and I sincerely regret my lack of action on these employees behalf. The Judges absolutely agree that it is ludicrous to continue dumping money into the old Courthouse with no plan or objective, but legally it is the Commissioners’ prerogative where they locate these personnel. The one thing the Court can do (and should have done long ago) is insist that the Commissioners provide a facility for the Probation Department that is reasonable and necessary for the Court’s needs. In order to accomplish this we are required to employ legal counsel.

5) With respect to the Court’s retention of legal counsel, by statute the Lorain County Prosecutor is the legal representative for both the Court and the County Commissioners. Normally, the Prosecutor is able to represent both parties without any problem. However, in the event of a conflict the Prosecutor cannot legally or ethically perform services for both parties. Accordingly the Court and the Commissioners are required to employee outside legal counsel to represent our respective interests. Unfortunately, because of ethical constraints the Court’s options for legal counsel are somewhat limited. Because the attorney for the Court will be representing all of the General Division Judges, this individual would be ethically precluded from also having other cases with these Judges. Thus any attorney who regularly appears before the Court would have a conflict and not be willing to take this representation. This essentially negates the Court’s ability to hire a local attorney. Additionally, this ongoing conflict with the Commissioners implicates extremely complex and unique areas of the law. As such, we actually had a difficult time identifying and hiring an attorney who was appropriately qualified.

6) In short (I apologize I have been anything but) the Court is always willing to entertain any reasonable solution to this dilemma. In the past couple of months the Judges have appeared a number of times at the Commissioners’ meetings seeking to discuss these matters. With the exception of Commissioner Williams, all these efforts have been rebuffed.

I would encourage you to further investigate this matter for yourself. If I can be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Tim Lubbe

Lorain County Court of Common Pleas
Court Administrator, General Division



Oh dear how awful: can you imagine working in such conditions that we in Lorain have been living in and complaining about to Judges:

The Mayor , the community all wanted answers and judgment to the fullest extent of the law ……check the PSI and time taken in that aspect of judiciary

We are all waiting and watching for justice to be done , as the criminals are slapped on the wrist to come back into our neighbors to continue their ways.

Brandon Perkins

LORAIN — The suspect wanted for setting fires at the Admiral King Elementary school playgrounds was arrested Saturday afternoon. Brandon Perkins, 18, of Lorain, was charged with one count of arson and is currently being held in the Lorain County Jail. Other charges may be released later this week, according to the Lorain Municipal Prosecutor’s office.
No other suspects are being sought according to Lorain Police. The estimated damage is $100,000.

And what happened to Brandon for this arson attack in our neighborhood:


Such was the sentence handed down by Judge Ewers in October 2013.
So Brandon got 3 years community control and just this month in fact On June 18th ( yesterday as I write this ) we hear http://cp.onlinedockets.com/loraincp/case_dockets/Docket.aspx?CaseID=328735 Brandon is once again before the ‘Judge” alleged “drug possession” etc.

Even our police officers are angry:

Fraternal Order of Police is worried that light sentences have made criminals feel impervious to the law.
“The criminals should fear going to judges,” Sivert said. “It’s not that way. I’ve heard criminals hoping that they get certain judges because they know they are going to get off light.”Ultimately, Sivert said that the public is going to have to decide what they feel is right and wrong.
“The citizens elect the judges and pay their salaries,” Sivert said. “The public needs to be demanding more of them. They need to tell these judges that letting criminals back on the street is not what they want.”
“As a representative of the Union, I’m saying that we won’t stand by without voicing our opinion. As a citizen, I’m hoping that others will also start demanding more.”

No certainly, we the taxpayer, wouldn’t want people to have to endure such unsafe and unsanitary conditions, such as we have to endure– Maybe if the judges lived in my “hood” they would be appalled at what we have to put up with in part due to what appears to be to the layman ( tax payers) some “slappy happy sentencing”.
2013 calls for serviceres

Because of some of their “adjudications”, the “clients of the court” are free to “loiter” in and around the library, the free food outlets and the consummate rehabilitated business people among them selling their wares……..


Remember the flash grenades that woke us up as the police raided the 5th street residence of Victor C Brooks– well as of June 14th in Judge Rothgery’s courtroom Mr. Brooks was found guilty http://cp.onlinedockets.com/loraincp/case_dockets/Docket.aspx?CaseID=320112 we await with “bated breath the sentencing !
swat 5th street No! sorry Mr. Lubbe you get no sympathy from me.



BUT whether the Judges or the Lorain County Commissioners have the right in all this I, as one of the taxpayers who pay for this nonsense would like to point out the wrong!

Here we go again fellow taxpayers, we pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars in salaries, expenses for the “professional capabilities of our employees”- We gave them the confidence of our vote and or their collective recommendations as to who to hire in various departments. BUT once again we are faced with having Cash Cow Subodh Chandra dropping us ( the tax payer ) into the field of cow patties that is the judical system.http://chronicle.northcoastnow.com/2014/06/18/judges-ante/



WHY??????? because these seemingly intelligent , professionals cannot seem to “talk”, compromise or make one another understand a situation from their perspective. NOPE! they play the media card, whine and weedle and the scarecrow ( tax payer ) tries to stop them from robbing the field.

Would they be in such a rush to spend their own money to prove their point or get their way NO! but hey! what is a few hundred thousand , or a million in legal fees to them – they aren’t paying for it we are and we have done it before.


Now these judges and yes they are the ones that have thrown down the “Chandra gauntlet” and here we go again– Each one of them before becoming a judge was an “advocate” are they telling me they have lost the ability to “advocate ” ( by sitting down and sorting this out without using more of our taxpayers money) for themselves and their employees then maybe they have lost the ability adjudicate as well.

Entry filed under: a Cow -elle opinion, Criminal Offenders, Legal, media, notorious opponents of exactitude. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Kink(s) Culture Shock – Best of British Pt 2 Chandra – Cha-chinging away- County Coffers and how it is done

6 Comments Add your own

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed



Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 230 other followers

June 2014

%d bloggers like this: