Hatcher provides OSU contract opinion

DAVE MOSIER/independent editor

Van Wert Law Director John Hatcher was asked to provide a legal opinion on the whether the city’s economic development contract with the Ohio State University Extension Service was a valid one.

Hatcher’s opinion, in essence: It’s valid until a court of law says it isn’t.

“Without defining legal authority, the recommendation of the law director is to act in accordance with the agreement in effect until, or unless, that contract is found to be void,” Hatcher wrote in his summation of the question.

In his 2½-page opinion, the law director stated both sides of the issue now confronting Van Wert City Council.

Hatcher noted that the Van Wert County Board of Commissioners have taken the position that OSU Extension cannot provide an economic development director that is also an Extension employee without the county being part of the contract. OSU Extension, on the other hand, says it does have the authority to sign a contract with the City of Van Wert by itself.

Late last week, Commissioner Todd Wolfrum, also an attorney, had written an opinion piece noting that he feels OSU Extension’s enabling legislation limits its ability to enter into contracts related to economic development.

“Because the enabling statutes do not confer specific authority to OSU to provide an economic development director to entities other than the counties, they contend that OSU does not have the capacity to contract with the City of Van Wert (or anyone else for that matter) to provide one of its employees for the position of economic development director,” Hatcher wrote in his opinion.

However, the law director notes, OSU Extension contends that other provisions of Ohio Revised Code Section 3335 does provide it with the authority to continue to provide economic development services to the city.

One of those provisions could be ORC 3335.16, Hatcher said, which is the provision that creates the OSU Extension Division.

“It is very broad in scope, but in general states that it has a purpose for carrying out the economic interests of the state,” Hatcher wrote.

Another possible statutory authority could be 3335.17, which talks the Extension Service’s need to cooperate with communities on a number of activities.

“To this end, as far as practicable, the extension division shall be placed at the service of educational, industrial or civic institutions, organizations and associations, and shall invite their active cooperation in matters relating to the civic, scientific, economic and social welfare of the citizens of the state.”

“Because the powers contained in 3335.16 and 3336.17 convey the purpose of assisting communities with economic development, OSU has the capacity to provide the services of its employee as director of economic development,” Hatcher said in his opinion.

Usually, when there are conflicting interpretations of law, attorneys look at legal precedents: how courts have ruled on the question in the past. The problem with the OSU contract question, Hatcher said, is there has never been a court ruling on the matter, since it the question has never been challenged in court.

“There are dozens of cases involving enabling legislation, but none of these cases involve universities,” the law director noted. “Also, those cases are full of courts trying to find exceptions or reasons why the state agency can act without enabling legislation.

Hatcher recommended that city officials request that the Van Wert County Common Pleas Court or Court of Claims render a declaratory judgment on the issue to remove the current legal uncertainty.

The law director also answered a second question related to the city’s contract with OSU Extension, noting that, in his opinion, “there is a contract until, or unless, a court of law says there is not,” which means the city needs to give one year’s notice before it can opt out of the contract.

“To prematurely terminate this agreement without legal authority would leave the City open to potential litigation for breach of contract,” Hatcher concluded.

Further discussion will be held on the issue, with a Judiciary and Annexation Committee meeting scheduled for 6 p.m. Monday, April 21, on the matter.