Complaint For Immediate Removal From Office - Cincinnati News, FOX19-WXIX TV

Copy Of Document

Complaint For Immediate Removal From Office

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO



Carrie Davis                                                                     CASE NO. ______________
Hamilton County taxpayer/citizen                             
Plaintiff

vs..

Michael K. Allen                                                       COMPLAINT FOR IMMEDIATE
Hamilton County Prosecutor                                          REMOVAL FROM OFFICE
230 East Ninth Street, Suite 4000                                      FOR CAUSE SHOWN
Cincinnati, OH 45202



Regrettably, the recent actions of Michael K. Allen and his inability to see beyond his own ego as to the necessity to resign, I take the following actions in order to spare the community unreasonable delay in fulfilling the public outcry for his inevitable removal.  As required per ORC 309.05, this complaint is filed and signed by at least one taxpayer, requesting that Michael K. Allen, Hamilton County Prosecutor be removed from office due to "wanton and willful neglect of duty" and "gross misconduct in office." and the office declared vacant.

UNDISPUTED FACTS

1) Allen has admitted engaging in a four year affair with a subordinate in the Prosecutor's Office in plain and serious violation of the policies and procedures of his own office and that of the County, regardless of being consensual or not.  His continued actions can only be characterized as gross misconduct in office with an indifference and arrogance that offends the moral standards of the community he has sworn an oath to uphold as much as they offend the legal standards of the county.

2) Allen, through his attorney, admits that when served with notice of a Civil Rights Complaint - he (and other senior staff members) again, violated, not negligently but knowingly, such policy and law for his own personal benefit and without regard for the legal and financial liabilities his actions posed to the community.  Independent actions of Allen, privately and publicly, constitute an interference in government operations and a misuse of confidential government records, thereby illegal and unethical. 

3) Allen's failure to notify the Board of an eminent lawsuit in which the Board may be involved represent willful and wanton neglect of duty.

4) Allen's unauthorized hiring of private legal counsel to negotiate in a suit that he knew or should have known involved the County represent an abuse of his authority and an intention to cover-up the incidence of complaint against him.

In the event the Court does not find that such aforementioned, undisputed actions are not sufficient alone to order the removal of  Michael K. Allen as Hamilton County Prosecutor and to declare such office vacant, I ask the court to set for hearing on those aforementioned issues and the alleged

5) violation of the Civil Rights Act, sexual harassment, by Allen.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff requests that upon granting such order for removal, that

1)  the Court order the Board of Commissioners to fulfill their duty in immediately naming an acting- prosecutor if and until the Republican Party presents and qualifies an appointee prior to the election of a successor.

2) the Court order the Board of Elections to prepare a special election and or ballot, either separately or in conjunction with the general election, providing the names of persons from each of the major representative parties of the county, and others meeting criterion established by the court and within a specified time frame, who wish to serve as an elected Prosecutor for Hamilton County in order to bring forth a duly elected prosecutor.

DISCUSSION

The provisions of ORC 3.09 "Appeal in removal cases; election to fill vacancy" describe the legal due processes for a person removed from office, reflect the complexities and poor timing of these specific circumstances and adequately provides for a means to permit the citizens to make a fair and true selection of the next County Prosecutor.  Because legislators could not have fathomed that an unopposed elected official would be removed from office so close to a general election, that the due process requirements would dispel the ability to meet such provisions in every circumstance, and that the ORC 305.02 "Filling vacancy in county offices" could result in the appointment or election of the very person deemed necessary to remove or unjustly favoring one party over another, invalidating our system of  checks and balances provided in the authority of judicial power and open elections - it is necessary for the court to order a special election or order other such provisions that will allow a free, equal and unencumbered election of persons interested and qualified to secure the intent of legislators on behalf of the public.


Respectfully Submitted,


Carrie Davis

Powered by Frankly